Reinventing philanthropyThe constant changing nature of philanthropists & philanthropic giving

Key IT trendsCharities and opportunities offered by new technology

Total returnThe benefits of following a total return investment approach

Making corporatepartnerships

October/November 2013 l www.charitytimes.com

work

http://www.aberdeen-asset.com

0 3www.charitytimes.com

The Lobbying Bill is quite a piece of legislation in the

making. It has had the impact of uniting such diverse sector

organisations as the League Against Cruel Sports and the

TaxPayers’ Alliance in opposition to the Bill. That is some

achievement.

The deep discontentment and confusion amongst the

sector is completely justified. This Bill at its heart threatens

the independence of charities and their ability to campaign.

As a result a diverse coalition of prominent charities,

campaign groups, academics, think-tanks and online networks launched an

independent Commission, the Commission on Civil Society and Democratic

Engagement, in response to concerns about the Lobbying Bill.

In its report, Non-Party Campaigning Ahead of Elections, Lord Harries of Pentregarth,

chair of the Commission, writes: “Part 2 of the Lobbying Bill risks profoundly

undermining the very fabric of our democracy by significantly limiting the right of

organisations — from charities and community groups to think-tanks and blog sites

— to speak out on some of the most important issues facing this country and the

planet. Whether we agree with these organisations or not, their role is essential in

order to have an informed, engaged electorate.”

The report addresses three key issues: the state of civil society’s engagement in

democratic processes; the likely impact of Part 2 of the Bill on campaigning activity

if it passes into law in its current form and what changes to regulation of non-party

campaigning are needed ahead of elections.

And in so doing, the Commission has recommendations that fall into three

categories: a central recommendation that the Government should pause Part 2

of the Bill to allow for proper consultation and consideration. Second, if the central

recommendation is not implemented, changes to Part 2 of the Bill to limit the

damage to democratic engagement of civil society and third, consideration of

regulatory changes to non-party campaigning beyond 2015.

The Commission concludes: “To follow the Committee’s recommendation would,

by definition, introduce a delay into the Bill’s legislative process and thus delay its

implementation. This would mean it would be unlikely the Bill’s provisions would be

in force prior to the 2015 General Election.

“However, the Electoral Commission have not indicated any need for such an

urgent change and in their briefings their concern has focused on the need for new

provisions to be considered, guidance produced and organisations given time to

make adjustments.”

One can only hope that the government listens to the strongest pleas here and, for

the benefit of the sector, puts the Lobbying Bill on hold.

Andrew Holt, Editor

EditorAndrew Holtandrew.holt@charitytimes.com020 7562 2411

Contributing Writers Beth Breeze, Stephen Bubb, David Emerson, Tracey Gyateng, Joe Irvin, Theresa Lloyd Maurice Mcleod, Alex Murdock, Cathy Pharoah, Ben Phillips, Antony Savvas, Hannah Stoddart, Oliver Wallin

Design & ProductionMatleena Liljamatleena@perspectivepublishing.com020 7562 2400

Commercial ManagerCerys Brafield cerys.brafield@charitytimes.com07766 662 610

Advertising ManagerSteve Goodsteve.good@charitytimes.com020 7562 2435

SubscriptionsJoel Whitefootjoelw@perspectivepublishing.com020 8950 9117 Subscription Rates (6 issues pa) £79pa registered charities£119pa rest of UK, £127pa EU £132pa elsewhere Printed by Warners Midlands All rights reserved. The views expressed are not necessarily those of the publishers. ISSN : 1355-4573 Published byPerspective Publishing, 6th Floor, 3 London Wall Buildings, London EC2M 5PD www.perspectivepublishing.com Managing Director John Woods

Publishing DirectorMark Evans

Holding the Lobbying Bill

Average net circulation of

10,373 copies for July 12 – June 13

E D I T O R I A L C O M M E N T

Has your investmentmanager downgraded

your service?

Rathbone Investment Management is authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authorityand regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority.

* As at 30 September 2013

For more details please contact Francesca Monti on

020 7399 0119francesca.monti@rathbones.com

www.rathbones.com

Unfortunately, it is an increasing trend; many investment management fi rmsappear to be putting the needs of their own business before your needs.

At Rathbones we seek to offer a solution; in a world where investment managementis increasingly impersonal and automated, our approach is truly compellingfor charity clients. We currently invest over £2.5 billion of charitable funds

globally on behalf of 967 charity clients*.

The value of investments and income arising from them may fallas well as rise and you might get back less than you originally invested.

21260-12_Rathbones Ad_Pewter Live_271x204_v1.indd 1 28/10/2013 14:39

32

29

36

News-in-Depth 06 An anatomy of social investment Analysis by Professor Paul Palmer 08 The ethics of investment National Ethical Investment Week

The Review 12 Surviving Austerity Reviewed by Joe Irvin13 Housing and philanthropy

Reviewed by Cathy Pharoah14 The Green Standard Reviewed by Alex Murdock

Analysis and Profile

10 Sector Analysis

Becky Slack analyses politics and the sector 20 Profile Andrew Holt met Rebecca Wood, CEO, Alzheimer’s Research UK

Columns 16 Trusts and foundations David Emerson on finance 17 Sector engagement Ben Phillips & Hannah Stoddart on climate change and the sector 18 Sector governance Stephen Bubb on boards 19 Data analysis Tracey Gyateng on sector data

0 5www.charitytimes.com

Charity Services

46 Suppliers Directory

Comprehensive listings of products and services for the sector

Features

PHIlANTHROPy 29 Reinventing philanthropy

Beth Breeze and Theresa lloyd analyse the history of philanthropy, finding it is not a simple, static activity with philanthropists open to change

KEy IT TRENDS 32 Technological engagement

Antony Savvas says charities are approach-ing the opportunities offered by new tech-nology with caution, but they shouldn’t be put off from testing the water

TOTAl RETURN 36 Freedom from constraint

Oliver Wallin argues that a switch to total return mandates could give charities a more effective way of managing risk

23C O V E R S T O R y : C O R P O R A T E P A R T N E R S H I P S Corporate partnerships are becoming more central to the work of sector

organisations, but measuring the impact of the partnership is key, says

Maurice Mcleod

C O N T E N T S

Professor Paul Palmer, professor of

voluntary sector management, and

Associate Dean for Ethics, Sustainability

and Engagement at Cass Business School

gave one of the most insightful discussions

on social investment at the Charity Times

Investment Conference held in October

in London.

Professor Palmer started with first

premises, stating social investment is an

emerging investment class which involves

a generation of blended social and

financial return on capital for the investor

and can include equity, bonds, charity

bonds or social impact bonds, or other

forms of debt which are typically issued by

charities and social enterprises.

“The social return is achieved as a result

of the deployment of capital raised by the

issuer in sustainable and social beneficial

activities,” said Professor Palmer. He noted

that most forms of social investment

are loans, share or partnership capital,

combinations of loans and equity funding

and unsecured loan notes.

Within this there are three other forms

of investment: Charity Bond; Social Impact

Bonds and Revolving Loans. Investment

is not limited to a charitable organisation

or excluded from an organisation that is

not charitable.

“The investment needs to be undertaken

for exclusively charitable or community

charitable purposes. Some incidental

private benefit is accepted,” he said.

He noted a charity wanting to engage

in social investment must ensure: the

investment is made within the powers

of the charity and the investment should

be prudent. The Charity Commission

has issued guidance to charities making

investments: Charities and Investment

Matters, A Guide for trustees (formally

referred to as CC14). The Commission

identifies two separate types of

investment that might be defined as

social investments. These are performance

related investments (PRI) and mixed

motive investments (MMI).

Palmer added that it should be noted

that the Charity Commission is continuing

to research PRI and MMI. “The Commission

accepts that the guidance is currently

lacking in some areas and the Commission

is hoping to improve on this,” said

Professor Palmer.

“The aim of a PRI is to use a charity’s

assets directly to further its aims in a way

that may also produce some financial

return for the charity.

“PRI is different from financial

investment as the justification for making

the PRI is to further the charity’s aims. The

charity must be able to show that the PRI

is wholly in furtherance of the charity’s

aims,” he said.

PRI often takes the form of loans, equity

investments or pooled funds. If the PRI is

a loan, the loan agreement should set out:

how it will be used to further the charity’s

aims; and a rate of interest considering the

impact on their charitable aims and the

rate that the borrower might able to and

willing to pay.

“Trustees must act in the best interest

of their charity when making a PRI and

ensure that: their charity’s funds are only

used to further its stated aims; they have

regard to private benefit; before making

the PRI trustees should be clear that and

it contributes to the charity’s strategic

aims and compare PRIs with other ways

of advancing the charity’s aims in terms of

effectiveness and risk.

“Where an investment cannot be wholly

justified as either a financial investment

or PRI, it may be possible to justify it as a

mixed motive investment.

“Investments still need to be justified

as being in the best interest of the

charity and trustees should consider the

justification for making the mixed motive

investment,” he said.

He noted the suitability of a mixed

motive investment for the charity is

addressed by: does it provide part financial

return and part contribution to the

charity’s aims?

On MMI, Professor Palmer said the size

of the MMI should be in the context of the

charity’s overall investment portfolio and

the charity’s attitude to risk .“An MMI is

not justified when it is made for purposes

other than furthering the charity’s aims

and securing a financial return. ”

CAF Venturesome suggests social

investment can work when organisations

are looking for funding to help them

make the transition to a more sustainable

business and bridge to confirmed grants,

which are increasingly paid in arrears and

develop assets for use in delivering their

activities as well as manage cash flow.

An anatomy of social investment

www.charitytimes.com

N E W S I N D E P T H

0 6

At the Charity Times Investment Conference, Andrew Holt

heard an invaluable in-depth analysis of social investment

PROFESSOR PAUL PALMER

“Social investment needs to be

undertaken for exclusively charitable

or community charitable purposes.

Some incidental private benefit is

accepted”

07_CToctober2013_jupiter_ansvar.indd 1 10/25/2013 1:25:37 PM

With National Ethical Investment

Week taking place in October,

much discussion was had on the nature

of ethical investment, and one leading

investment manager set-out how

investing ethically across rapidly growing

global environmental markets appeals

to charity investors and challenges the

myth that ethical investments tend

to underperform.

Hubert Aarts, managing director, listed

equities at Impax Asset Management,

said: “An ethical investment is simply

an umbrella term for any investment

that takes environmental, social and/or

governance issues into consideration.

“However, this definition is open to a

range of interpretations. Everyone draws

their line in the sand in a different place.”

Although he noted there are several

areas that are generally deemed beyond

the pale such as: armaments; animal

exploitation, human rights abuse,

environmentally damaging practices,

alcohol, gambling and pornography.

“These sectors are usually screened

out of ethical funds and it is this exclusion

aspect which has given rise to the

common misperception that negative

screening leads to weaker of performance.

Not necessarily so.

“Well managed companies, committed

to strong sustainability and good

governance, generally demonstrate

superior long term performance.

“We are all painfully aware of the result

of years of poor governance within the

UK banks and the far reaching impact

this continues to have. The omission of

companies that don’t deliver on these

practices is simply another layer of

risk reduction.”

Aarts noted however, that it is the

additional layer of positive vetting that

can add real value for investors.

“This focus is also high on the priority

list for most ethical investors as it endorses

the important theme of optimising

our limited resources and/or in finding

alternative solutions.

“But it is also gathering interest

from investors who do not necessarily

consider themselves ‘ethical’ or ‘green’

but are simply seeking long term growth

opportunities in global equities.

“Alternative and renewable energy,

energy efficiency, water, waste will

be amongst the fastest growing

global markets.

“The drivers are compelling and as the

world economy stabilises these markets

should deliver superior returns relative to

the more over-valued yield stocks which

have been preferred in recent years.”

In a wider context, Aarts said the

world population is growing rapidly

and with it massive wealth creation in

developing countries and subsequent

changes in consumption.

Within this, in the future, more of the

world’s population will inevitably live in

water stressed areas and water shortages

will be further exacerbated by changes

in agriculture and an increase in extreme

weather patterns and possibly longer term

climate change.

Aarts noted: “These resource efficiency

markets are growing considerably faster

than most other sectors, as companies

are seeing rapidly increasing demand for

their products and services. Globally there

are currently some 2,400 listed companies

with a combined market capitalisation in

excess of $7.3 trillion.

“Successful investing in these sectors

not only requires a deep understanding

of the industries in which these companies

operate, but also the mis-pricings that

occur because of the inherent complexity

of technologies, increasingly strict

regulation and the fact that many of

these companies are generally not well

understood or deeply researched by the

investment community.”

He added that alongside the obvious

benefits of rising earnings and wider

investor confidence across the economy,

stock ratings should rise further following

the announcement of new US policies

to conserve water, reduce flood risk and

limit greenhouse gas emissions, as well as

news on Japanese, Chinese and European

energy policy and pollution regulation.

“Investors who ignore these funda-

mental economic drivers could miss out

on an enormous opportunity for value

creation.

“The prospect that these markets should

outperform the wider economy over

the next decade and beyond resonates

strongly with a broad-based interest in

long-term ethical investing.”

The ethics of investment

www.charitytimes.com

N E W S I N D E P T H

0 8

Andrew Holt finds an asset manager arguing it is a mispercep-

tion that negative screening leads to a weaker performance

HUBERT AARTS

“Successful investing in these

sectors not only requires a deep

understanding of the industries in

which these companies operate, but

also the mis-pricings that occur“

mailto:mwotherspoon%40jupiter-group.co.uk?subject=

1 0

If last year’s party conference season

signified the “cooling of attitudes

towards charities” by government,

then this year it was positively frozen.

Whereas David Cameron had managed

to find room for one mention of the Big

Society in his 2012 closing speech, this

year there was nothing, not even a sniff

of recognition for the charitable sector

nor the many millions of people who

give their time and/or money to

help others.

Not that the other two main party

leaders fared much better. Even Ed

Miliband, former charities minister, didn’t

see fit to mention the role of voluntary

organisations in ‘making Britain better’

in his closing speech. To hear his views

on this area, an invitation to the ACEVO

Labour party reception was required.

Here he highlighted how the charity

sector is essential to tackling Britain’s

social challenges and “crucial to the

future of one nation and the future

of Britain”.

Policy announcements relating to the

sector were also pretty much non-existent.

No new incentives aimed at increasing

giving, no new pots of money, no new

ideas at all it seemed. Indeed the only

policy that referenced the sector was

George Osborne’s Help to Work scheme

that asks charities to offer volunteering

positions to the long-term unemployed.

When it came to conversations about

the value the third sector offers the UK

and other communities around the world,

one had to head to the fringes where, in

meeting rooms, theatres and restaurants

dotted around Glasgow, Brighton and

Manchester, charities had partnered with

think-tanks and media outlets to host

panel discussions and debates.

Political challenges

At the Liberal Democrat conference for

example, delegates could have attended

a Medical Aid for Palestinians fringe event

where Tony Laurence, chief executive of

the charity, talked through some of the

challenges of resolving the humanitarian

crisis in Palestine while the political

situation is so volatile.

While at the Conservatives, delegates

interested in the Syria conflict could have

learned just how dangerous the situation

on the ground is for aid organisations by

attending the Islamic Relief fringe with

Justine Greening. Conversation at this

event focused on the complexities of

negotiating with multiple actors to create

a safe humanitarian corridor that will allow

aid to reach those who need it. It was a

valuable opportunity for the organisation,

explains Jehangir Malik.

“Party conference season is an

important time for organisations like

Islamic Relief to communicate our

concerns to politicians and promote

the work we do,” says Malik, the aid

organisation’s UK director. “Last autumn

we had fringe debates at the Labour and

Conservative conferences on what can

be done to protect the most vulnerable

countries and communities against natural

disasters. This year we were able to ask the

Secretary of State to ensure that no stone

is left unturned in diplomatic efforts to

improve humanitarian access and bring

about peace talks.”

The fringe events also provided a

platform for charities looking to launch

or promote reports, such as that by World

Vision on preventing early marriage or

that by Anthony Nolan on how the NHS

is failing patients who undergo lifesaving

bone marrow transplants – a report that

calls for national guidelines so that every

patient receives the same level of care.

Wider impact

However, it wasn’t all about single issue

events. There was plenty going on that

tackled some of the challenges and

opportunities that are pertinent to the

wider charity sector.

Issues such as charity chief executive

salaries, for example. Readers can’t fail to

have seen the barrage of criticism directed

towards those organisations that pay their

leaders more than £100,000 a year. “The

leaders of some of the biggest charities

risk bringing ‘the wider charitable world

into disrepute’ by taking large pay rises

while donations are falling, according to

the regulator”, wrote the Daily Telegraph

in August.

John Low, chief executive of the

Charities Aid Foundation addressed this

negative coverage at his organisation’s

three fringe events, using them as an

opportunity to criticise both the Charity

Commission for its “bizarre” response

to the backlash and for “making

statements that undermine public trust

in charities”, and trustees of charities,

which he accused of failing to defend

their own organisations.

“I am very disappointed that the chairs

and trustees of charities have been

absolutely silent on the matter. They are

the ones responsible for running the

charities, for setting the pay. If they set [the

salaries], they should be willing to defend

them,” he said.

Meanwhile, funding, as always, was the

focus of several sessions.

The Social Investment Forum, for

example, kicked off its series of fringe

events with the launch of a new model

of funding at the Liberal Democrat

conference. Local Impact Funds, which

have been designed to work closely with

Local Enterprise Partnerships, offer a new

way of providing “simple finance for local

P O L I T I C A L A N A L Y S I S

B E C K Y S L AC K F O U N D T H E M A I N P O L I T I C A L PA R T Y

CO N F E R E N C E S L AC K I N G I N A N Y S E C TO R N A R R AT I V E, B U T

T H E R E WA S A N I N T E R E S T I N G D E B AT E O N T H E F R I N G E S

Political dialogue

www.charitytimes.com

1 1

P O L I T I C A L A N A L Y S I S

charities and enterprises”.

They will bring together local and

national partners and investors to provide

tailored support for organisations, which

will help them become investment ready

and enable scaling up and growth: see

www.charitytimes.com on September 18

for more on this.

Economic landscape

Meanwhile, at the Labour party fringe,

Nick O’Donohoe, chief executive of Big

Society Capital reminded delegates that

social investment is not the panacea to

the charity sector’s funding woes. It is not

a replacement for grant funding and has

been designed to support organisations in

very specific ways, he said.

Also at the Labour party conference

fringe, Gareth Thomas MP reflected on the

current political and economic landscape

for charities and how government rhetoric

has the potential to have an adverse

impact on the number of people willing

to donate time and money.

Thomas, who was Shadow Minister for

Civil Society at the time of the conference,

said: “If the challenge is to persuade zero-

givers to get active, what you don’t do is

start attacking charities in the way we’ve

started to see a range of government

figures doing. It seems like a very different

environment for charities to be making

their pitch to volunteers than what David

Cameron offered when he talked about

the ‘big society’ as the answers to the

problems of Britain.”

Thomas also called for greater co-

ordination and joint working between

the sector’s three largest bodies: the Big

Lottery fund, Big Society Capital and the

Charity Commission, something he feels is

essential if critical issues such as funding

and maintaining volunteering levels are to

be addressed.

“It ought to be the job of the

government to set the priorities for these

three sector bodies,” he said, “and at the

moment I don’t see that”, emphasising

how the current government has failed to

coordinate a “clear, coherent strategy”.

Social economy

However, this is not for the want of trying,

according to Nick Hurd, minister for Civil

Society. Speaking at the Social Economy

Alliance fringe in Manchester he referred

to the “constant frustration” he feels at

some departments’ lack of enthusiasm for

the social economy

When asked whether enough had been

done to promote the charity sector, he

admitted that the answer was “no”, saying

that many public sector bodies are not

ambitious enough in their transactions

with charities and social enterprises –

primarily down to their aversion to risk.

Civil servants feel their first

responsibility is to protect ministers’

reputations, which means playing it safe,

he said: “But that underestimates the risk

of the status quo. We’re paralysed by the

idea that might fail, but look at what we

achieved in the past, when we had all

the money.”

“There are departments of government

that don’t get this stuff at all. It’s our

responsibility and our mission to push

it so that they do,” he added.

However it wasn’t all bad news. Hurd

added: “We have a window of opportunity

now to [help government departments

understand the sector], because

circumstances have changed. People are

having to think differently.”

Becky Slack is a freelance journalist

www.charitytimes.com

We have a window of opportunity now to help government departments understand the sector, because circumstances have changed. People are having to think differently Nick Hurd, minister for Civil Society

www.charitytimes.com

T H E R E V I E W

1 2

Surviving austerity by nef

Surviving Austerity from nef is the product of a two-year study of two

deprived areas – Tottenham in London and Aston in Birmingham. The research explores how people were experiencing austerity, welfare changes and economic pressures. Using peer research, interviews desk research and workshops, they found startling evidence that austerity is creating greater inequality and hitting the poorest hardest. The report rejects the ‘strivers versus skivers’ rhetoric – finding that in-work poverty and poor wages and conditions are bigger causes of poverty than worklessness. This report pulls no punches in stating that austerity is not working. The report concludes: “Current policies appear to be making matters worse for those in areas we studied (Birmingham and Tottenham), rather than better.” It finds that work is pushing people into poverty not lifting them out. A “no pay – low pay cycle” has been created by precarious, part-time and poorly paid employment.

The report is equally forthright on increasing inequality: “The burden of reducing Britain’s deficit is falling predominantly on those who get vital support from public services and welfare.” The new austerity is disproportionately affecting women, those who are disabled and the young. Austerity is also hitting the Core Economy - a description of the everyday things people do to care for each other such as looking after relatives, helping friends and bringing up kids.

And cuts are going beyond ‘efficiency savings’. Real reductions are being made in important services and entire services are being cut – most notably youth support. Local authority budget cuts are creating a “race to the bottom” on cost for many local services, creating false economies. Nationally there has been an upsurge in support for Early Intervention, tackling issues at the early stage to prevent much more damaging and costly consequences later, with Government support for the Early Intervention

Foundation. But the report finds that at a local level spending is shifting from prevention to reaction, again youth services is used as the example. This race to the bottom, it is suggested, may also have consequences for the success of the Social Value Act.

The research also looks at the Big Society and says that the high hopes of the Big Society have fallen flat in these areas. It explores why this should be and suggests it is due to economic insecurity making people more inward looking; the weakening of the core economy; the turmoil that cuts and increased demand are having in the voluntary sector; the failure to understand that not all communities are equal; the separation of

the state from individuals, families and communities; and finally it is seen as a cover for the cuts.

But the report does not just identify the problems, drawing on this evidence and wider research and case studies (ranging from Cleveland Ohio to Camden in London), the report sets out a rich menu of actions that can be adopted by local actors to tackle the problems created by the recession and austerity measures. These fall into five themes: 1. Embedding fairness in all decisions; 2. Commissioning for social value; 3. Co-production as standard; 4. Making well-being for all the goal of public services; 5. Developing sustainable economies.

The key to these measures is local authorities, voluntary organisations and residents working together. NAVCA has always been clear that although local authorities are making many cuts affecting local charities, we need to work together.Austerity is bound to create hardship. With the Chancellor announcing more welfare reform and more years of austerity, this report provides timely evidence that the hardship is being felt disproportionately and damagingly in the poorest families and communities. We are not ‘all in this together’. It argues that poverty is now prevalent among those in work, making the divisive ‘strivers v skivers’ rhetoric baseless. And at local level, prevention is being sacrificed for despite the long term costs stored up. This report could be criticised for its daring universal conclusions gleaned from specific data. However, it provides a refreshing insight into real local experiences which lie behind dry statistics. It also provides thought-provoking ideas on how local authorities, the sector and communities need to work together to pursue better solutions.

Joe Irvin is CEO of NAVCA

The paper is available at: www.neweconomics.org

J O E I R V I N O B S E R V E S T H I S R E p O R T C O U L D B E C R I T I C I S E D F O R I T S D A R I N G C O N C LU S I O N S G L E A N E D F R O M S p E C I F I C D ATA , B U T D O E S p R O V I D E A R E F R E S H I N G I N S I G H T

www.charitytimes.com

T H E R E V I E W

Rebuilding the relationship between affordable housing and philanthropy,

a new publication from The Smith Institute, peabody, and New philanthropy Capital (NpC), sees housing join the queue increasingly knocking on the doors of foundations and donors as the government’s purse-strings tighten.

The word ‘rebuilding’ in its title refers back to Victorian philanthropy and the investments of Cadbury, Rowntree, peabody and others in decent living conditions, but, is somewhat misleading as none of the authors believes today’s philanthropy can seriously dent UK housing need. Indeed it is refreshing to find an upfront and frequently depressing acknowledgement of the limitations of bringing the David of philanthropy to tackle the Goliath of housing need in what aims to be a manifesto. The strength of the approach, however, is that collectively the pot-pourri of papers gradually build a picture of where philanthropy might realistically make a difference.

An opening article by Vicki prout, NpC, sets out the negative impacts of government welfare reform on capacity to pay rent, and the new financial burden of increased discretionary housing payment. The knock-on effects of housing problems on mental health, employment opportunity and even greater demand for cheap accommodation are highlighted, concluding with a cri de coeur that “even if philanthropic money can only nibble around the edges….(of housing need), surely this work is worth doing.”

The fundamental need of housing associations for access to large-scale reliable capital funding if access to homes is to be measurably improved is emphasised by David Orr from the National Housing Federation. philanthropy is highly unlikely to reach the scale of the resource needed, but might be able to make a difference in specific areas such as a potential Social Impact Bond for supported housing for the

elderly, which could reduce emergency hospitalisations and their associated costs. He also suggests community “crowd-funding” to raise part-investment for local developments. The scope and options for foundations to make social investments in housing are clearly and realistically appraised by Daniel Sattar, from the Esmee Fairbairn Foundation. He sees the most important contribution of foundations as their freedom to take on riskier programme-related investment in areas of high need, providing the subsidy which might just free up private capital, so-called ‘mix-motive’ finance. Nick Salisbury, Social Finance, sees a role for philanthropic investment in the provision of specialist housing for the most vulnerable.

Concrete experience as innovative suppliers in the affordable housing market are brought to the publication by Lord Richard Best, and by Brian Ham, CEO of Dolphin Square Foundation, set up on the proceeds of the sale of Dolphin Square. Ham spells out the realities of a robust approach to creating financial viability in the provision of affordable housing, in his case focussing on the under-served but “vibrant rental market for young professionals” in London. Ham draws attention to how the high value land and property market in London also has the effect of excluding other important segments such as its young, and less

well-off, but essential workforce. Overall the report offers no central or

specific definition of what it means by “affordable’”in relation to philanthropy, and Ham’s paper also states the case for this particular rental market as a good property investment prospect for capital-rich charities.

In a final paper, however, peter Malpass outlines a history of failed housing policy due to housing increasingly being treated as a highly valuable investment class rather than a basic human need. Together the papers in this pamphlet provide an interesting discoursive journey through the field of social housing and philanthropy. At times its conflicting perspectives only serve to underline the complexities of housing supply and demand in the UK.

Cathy Pharoah is professor of Charity Funding and Co-Director of the ESRC Research Centre for Charitable Giving and Philanthropy Research, Cass Business School

The paper is available at: www.thinknpc.org

Rebuilding the relationship between affordable housing & philanthropy

1 3

C AT H y p H A R O A H F I N D S T H I S pA p E R p R O V I D E S A N I N T E R E S T I N G J O U R N E y T H R O U G H T H E F I E L D O F S O C I A L H O U S I N G A N D p H I L A N T H R O p y, W H I C H , AT T I M E S O F F E R S C O N -F L I C T I N G p E R S p E C T I V E S W H I C H S E R V E TO U N D E R -L I N E T H E C O M p L E x I T I E S O F H O U S I N G A S A N I S S U E

T H E R E V I E W

This review of UK political leadership

on the environment since the General

Election in 2010 is produced by a coalition

of ‘green’ and environmental organisations

under the aegis of Green Alliance,

an environmental think tank. The publica-

tions’ stakeholder organisation represent

an interesting, though not necessarily very

diverse, group encompassing on the one

hand organisations focussed on transport

and natural ecology and on the other

hand organisations who perhaps wear

their campaigning orientation fairly

obviously such as Friends of the Earth

and Greenpeace. When a document is a

composite of the efforts of a coalition of

stakeholders it is useful to be clear as to

the nature of these stakeholders. There

are a large number of NGO’s involved in

the environment though for some of them

their focus is perhaps orientated towards

a particular aspect.

The Royal Society for the Protection of

Birds as one of the largest membership

organisations has an obvious such focus

yet perhaps strangely the subject of birds

has no specific mention in the document.

Perhaps the RSPB is confident that politi-

cians of all hues will recognise the argu-

ment and so specific mention is unneces-

sary especially where issues such as

a Thames estuary airport are concerned.

The outline of this review therefore

tends to be somewhat broad in nature.

The four areas of focus: the economy,

communities, nature and international

leadership also reflect this rather broad

brush approach to the environment. The

review embraces all the major parties at

Westminster. The fleeting reference to the

Green Party and the nationally focussed

parties of the UK perhaps fails to acknowl-

edge the importance that such Parties

might play in influencing the Westminster

agenda. Possibly in the nature agenda

Scotland and Wales punch well above their

population weight in shaping the nature

agenda in respect of both preservation

of nature and plant and species diversity.

Scotland is reported to be the first country

in Europe to have produced a detailed

map of its wilderness areas. The focus

on the Westminster level perhaps takes

away some of the more interesting data

and richness which a wider trawl would

have elicited. However in a relatively brief

(21 page) document this is understand-

able. The document gives a generally

well informed and critical account of the

performance of both the major parties

and main politicians in the period up to its

publication date. Some politicians come

out looking better than others.

The report is quite critical of David Cam-

eron comparing his strong and ‘passionate’

stance on the environment prior to the

2010 election with for his relative silence

after coming into government noting that

he has “not given a public speech on the

environment or challenged the growth of

climate science denial in his party”.

The more cynical political observers

amongst us might note that “few policy

promises made in opposition withstand

the move into government”. The Lib-

eral Democrats as the junior party in the

coalition are seen as subject to internal

disagreement with their members being

encouraged to vote against their own

policy of decarbonising electricity. It could

be argued that in a situation of austerity

and recession environmental issues can

get displaced in the order of priorities.

The formal opposition in that sense

is free to profess a commitment to

environmental (and indeed) other policies

secure in the knowledge that they do

not have to immediately deliver on them.

However even the Labour Party comes

in for criticism for its “failure to set out

apositive vision of how it will respond to

the serious decline of nature’”. Thus it is

in a democracy.

Since its publication, the issues around

energy and in particular, the increased cost

of energy have to be seen in the context

of environment policy. Inevitably there

are trade-offs in policy terms between

environmental ‘green’ issues and the reali-

ties of fuel poverty and a perceived need

to ensure long-term assurance of energy.

Such policy dilemmas possibly have more

consequences for the Labour party who

may find it difficult to justify environmen-

tal policies which have associated costs.

Professor Alex Murdock is head of

Centre of Government and Charity

Management, London South Bank

University

The paper is available from:

www.green-alliance.org.uk

Green Standard 2013 by the Green Alliance

T H I S PA P E R ’ S A S S E S S m E N T

O F U K P O L I T I C A L L E A D E R -

S H I P O N T H E E N V I R O N m E N T

SINCE THE GENERAL ELECTION

T E N D S TO B E S O m E W H AT

B R OA D I N N AT U R E, F I N D S

A L E x m U R D O C K , B U T

R E V E A L S I N T E R E S T I N G

C H A L L E N G E S F O R A L L

P O L I T I C A L PA R T I E S

1 4 www.charitytimes.com

For charity insurance, search ‘Markel’

We see What others Miss

CT_angel_Apr13.indd 1 28/03/2013 13:28

C O L U M N

1 6

This month saw over 300 delegates

from across the trusts and foundations

sector gather for the annual ACF Confer-

ence. As always, there was a great deal

of thought provoking discussion and a

supportive atmosphere geared towards

the sharing of insight and best practice.

This year, I was struck by the fact that

the largest workshop session of the day

was the one focussing on social invest-

ment. Viewed from the outside, and

given that only a small proportion of ACF

members are actively engaged in social

investment at present, this might seem

unusual. However, it serves to underline a

key point: outside interest in this market

is growing and foundations are keen to

consider what, if any, role they might play.

With that already in mind, ACF

launched the results of research under-

taken over the course of this year. The

report, Charitable trusts and foundations

engagement in the social investment mar-

ket, gives the clearest picture yet of the

emerging market viewed from a foundation perspective. The find-

ings of the research have provided significant food for thought,

running counter to many initial preconceptions and highlighting

the unique role that trusts and foundations occupy. To date they

have set aside £100m for social investment with around £50m

already committed to specific deals.

Contrary to the assumptions of those coming to the market

from other perspectives, who felt that foundations main interest

in social investment was the chance to recycle funds, the research

shows that no matter which way you look at it, for foundations,

mission is rightly key. The research, which surveyed over 80 trusts

and foundations, alongside interviews with key players within the

sector, provided a consistent message: for foundations the prior-

ity is their overall charitable aim, and any social investment must

always be aligned with this core concern.

The centrality of mission is one of a number of complexities

particular to trusts and foundations, many of which have not

previously been understood by those outside of the sector. The

overall picture revealed in the research is one characterised by

nuance, with all participants viewing social investment as ‘another

useful tool in the toolbox’, rather than as a potential replacement

for grants.

The research was also able to give a

picture of ‘a typical social investment’,

characterised as an unsecured 100k loan

over five years with some repayment

dependent on the success of the project.

Foundations are therefore typically

providing risk capital to charities and

social enterprises who may not be able to

access finance from commercial lenders

because they are starting out, rapidly

scaling up, or because they fall outside

the service delivery mainstream.

Such social investments generally

deliver a below market return, so decisions

to invest must necessarily weigh social

return against the hit which will impact

the money available as ‘pure grant’.

Respondents also outlined a number of

limiting factors with regard to investment

scale, notably the lack of suitable deals

coming forward and pre-existing pres-

sures on capacity and expertise. This issue

is perhaps most tellingly illustrated by the

fact that 90% of sector social investments

made so far have come from ten large

foundations with endowments exceeding

£100m. The presence of suitably skilled

staff is usually key to making social investments.

All of which inevitably begs the question; how might we best

understand the contribution of trusts and foundations to the

emerging social investment market? I would argue that the

bespoke, considered nature of foundations’ involvement is a

strength; offering a genuinely alternative approach to those who

must put finance first. By focusing on their charitable objectives,

as well as being able to mobilise a wealth of experience in how to

effect meaningful social change, foundations’ are able to make a

powerful offer: a partnership based not on return, but on doing

what it takes to get the job done, often in the most difficult to

tackle areas at the most crucial stage of an enterprise’s growth.

As a nascent market, social investment may yet be altered by

factors currently unknown. Our research shows, however, that in

the current funding ecology, trusts and foundations are occupying

a singular space. Though their assets are restricted to their charita-

ble aims and small in comparison to institutional finance, the fact

that foundations are driven by mission, underpinned by experi-

ence and unfettered by the constraints of big finance means that

their ‘boutique’ role has a valuable contribution to make.

David Emerson is ACF chief executive

Trusts and foundations

www.charitytimes.com

Social investment

D AV I D E m E R S O n argues that

the bespoke nature of founda-

tions involvement is a strength;

offering a genuinely alternative

approach to those who must put

finance first

C O L U m n

1 7

Five years ago the world hit a crisis.

The global financial system collapsed,

oil reached $147 a barrel, and food

prices leapt, precipitating protests in 61

countries, with riots or violent protests

in 23. By 2009, the number of hungry

people passed one billion for the first

time. It represented a ‘perfect storm’

generated by an unstable financial

system, an over-dependency on fossil

fuels, and the creeping impacts of climate

change on poor people’s access to food.

Fast-forward to today, and the crisis

isn’t over: we still stand on the edge of

a precipice, with the poorest at ever-

increasing risk from impending food,

financial and fossil fuel crises.

If today one person in eight goes to

bed hungry, analysis suggests that the

number of people at risk of hunger is

projected to increase by 10–20 per cent

by 2050 as a result of climate change. It is

estimated that this could increase child

malnutrition by 20 per cent relative to a

world with no climate change, eliminating the improvements that

may otherwise have occurred. Even with global warming of less

than 2°C by the 2050s, total crop production in sub-Saharan Africa

could be reduced by 10 per cent. With higher levels of warming,

countries in sub-Saharan Africa could experience catastrophic

declines in yield of 20–30 per cent by 2080. According to one

estimate, it could rise as high as 50 per cent in Sudan and Senegal.

Oxfam’s work with smallholders in developing countries indicates

that these creeping, insidious changes in the seasons (such as

longer, hotter dry periods), shorter growing periods, and unpre-

dictable rainfall patterns are bewildering farmers, making it harder

for them to know when best to sow, cultivate, and harvest their

crops. The fisherwomen Oxfam works with in Bangladesh and the

farmers we have spoken to in Zambia report that climate change

is threatening their economic survival.

Last month the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is-

sued a stark warning, stating that the thousands of scientists who

partook in its latest study are ‘unequivocal’ that climate change

is happening and is caused by human activity. Importantly, the

Panel stated that to avoid dangerous levels of climate change,

beyond 2C, the world can only emit a total of between 800 and

880 gigatonnes of carbon. Of this, about 530 gigatonnes had

already been emitted by 2011. The report

confirmed the burning of fossil fuels has

been the main contributor to the 40%

increase in C02 concentrations since the

industrial revolution. The message is clear

— one way or the other we need to kick

the fossil fuel habit if we have any chance

of avoiding climate catastrophe, which

Oxfam knows is already making poor

people hungry, and stands to plunge mil-

lions more into poverty and desperation

unless we limit carbon emissions.

So if the connection between food

and fossil fuels is clear, this brings us to

the final ‘f’ — finance. Fossil fuel reserves

are distributed across stock exchanges in

major financial centres around the world.

Capital markets support the continued

exploitation of these reserves in order

to generate short-term returns. Carbon

Tracker, Grantham Institute and nicholas

Stern have warned that 60-80% of fossil

fuel reserves of companies listed on

global stock markets is ‘unburnable’ if the

world is to have a chance of not exceed-

ing global warming of 2°C.

Of these fossil fuel reserves, coal is the

dirtiest and is the biggest single source of CO2 emissions globally.

not only are the climate change impacts of coal devastating. It

also leads to displacement, social unrest and hugely undermines

public health. millions of India’s Adivasi (tribal) people live in

states such as Orissa, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh that are being

devastated by coal mining. Yet coal companies listed on the Lon-

don stock exchange alone are receiving huge amounts of finance

from London-based investors including from private banks and

pension funds. What this means is if we continue with business-as-

usual, we are without doubt heading for climate catastrophe, with

more severe and accelerating food crises, and more hungry and

desperate people. At Oxfam, we’re starting to realise that the story

of suffering, of farmers losing their crops, of families going hungry,

is tied up with the story of a financial sector cashing in on a warm-

ing planet. As development agencies we need to follow our obser-

vations to their logical conclusion. A hot world is a hungry world. It

is also a socially and financially unstable and food insecure world.

Tackling the triple crises of food, fossil fuels and finance is crucial

in creating a safer, fairer, more just future free from hunger.

Ben Phillips is campaigns and policy director of Oxfam. Han-

nah Stoddart is head of Oxfam’s economic justice policy team

Sector engagement

B E n P H I L L I P S A n D H A n n A H

S TO D D A R T connect the many

links the sector can make in

finance and politics based on

Oxfam’s experience and the

issue of climate change

Climate change

www.charitytimes.com

C O L U M N

1 8

Given the challenging circumstances

that many charities now face, good

governance has arguably never been

more important. Many charities have

experienced major changes over the

last few years, as they adapt to falling

income from both private and public

sources, move into new areas of activity

and develop closer relationships with

both the public and private sectors. These

shifts have put extra pressure on charities’

core governance functions. For example,

around evaluating and managing risk,

securing financial sustainability and

setting strategic priorities.

Consequently, after ACEVO noticed

a sizeable increase in demand for

both ACEVO’s Governance Helpline

and its CEO in Crisis Service during

2012, we felt it was time to look more

closely at sector governance and try to

better understand the everyday issues

faced “on the ground.” We set up a

Governance Commission led by senior

sector representatives, who spent several months engaging with

the sector through regional consultation sessions, as well as an

online survey. The results fed into a published report, Realising

the Potential of Governance, which was launched last September.

The aim of the report was not to re-state the principles of good

governance, but to understand the realities and put forward

recommendations to help charities ensure that their governance

is robust enough to meet the challenges ahead. Guided by the

results of our consultation exercises, the published report focused

on three areas: appraisal and accountability, understanding of

roles and responsibilities, and board management.

The Commission’s consultation work led to some interesting

findings. For example, the need to formally evaluate CEO

performance is widely accepted and 65 per cent of charities

do so at least annually. However, the majority of charities have

never evaluated the performance of their chair. Given the central

importance of the chair’s role to an effective charity, does this

state of affairs make sense? The commission thought not, and

the report puts forward suggestions and case study examples to

help charities put an effective chair appraisal system into place.

The report also calls on the Charity Commission, funders

and commissioners to play a greater role in strengthening

external accountability for governance

and promoting a culture of ongoing

evaluation and improvement within

charity boards.

The commission also considered how

charities can ensure that both board

members and staff understand the

requirements of their positions. Charity

trustees have a unique and increasingly

complex role, and our survey showed that

more than 10 per cent of respondents

were not confident that the different

roles and responsibilities of their board,

CEO and chair were clear and understood.

Comprehensive induction processes,

clear schemes of delegation and ongoing

training and development can all help

to address this issue. Perhaps more

important, however, is the development

of an organisational culture that supports

clear communication, mutual support

and continuous improvement.

Finally, the commission looked at how

charities can establish and maintain

a well-functioning board and a high

standard of governance overall. Survey

data showed that the recruitment

of a diverse board of trustees, a longstanding challenge for

many charities, remains particularly problematic: 52 per cent of

survey respondents felt that their organisation had difficulty in

recruiting trustees from under-represented backgrounds. It is

essential that the sector’s governance reflects the diversity of

the beneficiaries, supporters and communities it represents, but

there is clearly still a long way to go in this area. The report looks

at the different approaches that charities have used to improve

board diversity, ranging from targeted recruitment to the use of

agencies specialised in recruiting from under represented groups.

At the least, using an open and advertised recruitment process

will prevent the development of an “old boys’ network”, where

boards recruit largely from their pre-existing contacts without

approaching wider communities. As ACEVO’s governance team

often remarks, good governance is most vital at the point when

things go wrong- by which time it is far more difficult to address

any issues. We hope that the report will encourage charities to

reflect on their governance arrangements even when things

are going well, and ensure that they are robust and sustainable

enough to withstand any future challenges.

Sir Stephen Bubb is chief executive of ACEVO

Sector governance

www.charitytimes.com

Board evaluation

It is essential that the sector’s

governance reflects the diversity

of the beneficiaries, supporters

and communities it represents,

says S T E P H E N B U B B but, he

warns, there is clearly still a long

way to go

C O L U M N

1 9

Sector analysis

Everyone’s talking about data: open

data, big data, private data — it’s the

latest buzzword to sweep through the

sector. As a self-confessed data geek I am

delighted by this trend. And there’s good

cause for it too, because by engaging

with data in the right way, charities can

better understand the issues they work

on, operate more effectively, and improve

their understanding of the difference

they make. The bad news, however, is

that most charities are currently not

taking advantage of the opportunities it

presents.

There are numerous examples of how

charities can use data, but fundraising

is an area organisations are always keen

to hear about. In the current economic

climate, budgets are being squeezed,

with NCVO and CAF reporting that the

charitable sector received the lowest

level of donations in 2011/12 since the

survey first began in 2004/05.

Inevitably, fundraisers have come

under increasing pressure, with many exploring ways to better

connect and understand current donors whilst looking towards

new methods of reaching donors by expanding their digital

activities. Earlier this year, NPC’s Money for Good UK report

examined who, why, and how people donate. In the next stage of

the project charities will have the opportunity to apply our donor

segmentation tool to their own fundraising data and use it to fine

tune their approaches.

Barnsley Hospice provides another example of how data can

be used to improve fundraising. By linking the postcodes from

their donor database to the local council’s dataset showing the

socio-economic profile of neighbourhoods, they are able to tailor

their fundraising strategy for each area, for example, by marketing

small pledges for lower income areas and corporate giving where

businesses are located.

Despite these good examples, the sector as a whole still has

a lot of work to do to fully engage with the data agenda. There

are plenty of options for charities to start using data in more

imaginative ways, particularly to understand their results, but

we’re just not seeing the response from charities.

For example, charities working with offenders can now use

the Ministry of Justice’s Justice Data Lab to find out whether or

not the clients they work with go on to

re-offend. However, uptake of the service

has been relatively slow, though we are

hoping that this will pick up as the tool

becomes more established.

NPC recently published The Power of

Data: Is the charity sector ready to plug in?

which examined the demand and supply

side barriers to charities engaging with

the data agenda. On the supply side,

more progress needs to be made around

making data available, particularly in

a way that is useful and accessible to

charities — something our Data Labs

project aims to by increasing the supply

of government held data and analysis

for impact measurement, and to support

charities to use the data. The picture on

the demand side is more complex, and

the key barriers outlined in The power of

data are:

Awareness: charities and funders

need to be aware of the potential of

data sets that are relevant to their work

and publically available (or that could

be requested), and how to access these.

Capability: Most charities don’t have

specialised analysts or research departments, so making the most

of data can be difficult as at the minimum it requires someone

with an aptitude for, and interest in, analysis.

Capacity: Data analysis is difficult and requires resource,

including time and technology. Frontline charities rarely have the

money for this, or the funding to bring it in externally.

Further to this, there is also the concern that many charities are

nervous of the disruption results could bring; that is, what would

happen if they suddenly found out that they weren’t achieving

what they thought they were. This fear of failure is a major barrier

and will only change if the attitudes of charities, funders and

commissioners are shifted and enlightened.

Data, and what can be done with data, is a rapidly progressing

field, and as things stand, the charity sector risks being left behind

by not engaging with the opportunities it brings and by not

ensuring that its interests and requirements are represented by

initiatives to open it up.

Tracey Gyateng is data labs manager at NPC. Data will be one

of the topics covered at NPC and CFG’s Impact Leadership

Conference 2014, supported by Charity Times. For more

information visit: http://www.thinknpc.org/events/

Charity data

There are plenty of options

for charities to start using

data in more imaginative ways,

particularly to understand their

results, but we are not seeing

the response from charities,

argues T R AC E Y G YAT E N G

www.charitytimes.com

T H E C H A R I T Y T I M E S I N T E R V I E W

W I T H A R I S E I N I N Co M E o f 1 1 p E R

C E N T l A S T Y E A R , A l z H E I M E R ’ S

R E S E A R C H U K H A S b U C K E d T H E T R E N d

o f T H E E Co N o M I C E N V I R o N M E N T. b U T

T H AT I S o N lY o N E S U CC E S S A M o N g S T

M A N Y, f I N d S A N d R E W H o lT

Winning the 2013 Charity Times Awards Charity of the Year

with an income between £1million and £10million is a high

mark in excellence and Alzheimer’s Research UK has shown on

many fronts why they won the award.

The solidity of its work can be seen on the last year alone, with

the charity measuring its work against four key and well achieved

objectives. These were: an increase in funding for pioneering

UK-based dementia research; an increase in outreach to the

public to improve understanding through health information

dissemination, communication and media; forge stronger links

with government and its departments to influence public

spending on dementia research and the direction of publicly-

funded research programmes, and finally, increase charitable

income by 5-10 per cent through investment in fundraising,

marketing and communications functions. That is some list.

from this, the evidence of success is all here: the funding of

research in the past year reached a new record high of £5.5million.

Alzheimer’s Research UK’s current dementia research portfolio

has passed the £20million mark for this first time, with over 140

projects taking place at leading institutions across the UK and

is now the second leading funder of dementia research in the

UK, behind the government-funded Medical Research Council.

Alzheimer’s Research UK is also the second largest charity funder

of dementia research in the world.

on the second point, Alzheimer’s Research UK has increased its

dementia information activity, including securing and retaining

the NHS. It also disseminated leaflets on dementia to every UK

gp surgery and a huge number of nursing homes and libraries to

improve public understanding.

Thirdly, Alzheimer’s Research UK has campaigned on the

singular issue of public dementia research funding over the past

few years. It stands as its greatest policy success that the launch

of the prime Minister’s Challenge on dementia in March 2012

announced a doubling in research funding to £66million over the

next three years.

fourthly, and possibly most impressively, charitable income for

the past financial year was £9.12million, up over 11 per cent on

the prior year, a remarkable achievement given the challenging

economic environment. Its spending on charitable activities

increased by 17 per cent over the prior year, including record

investments of £5.5million in research and over £1million in

information, education and advocacy which have helped boost

its profile and contributed to the vast improvements in public

spending on dementia research.

Winning the battle

Profile: Rebecca Wood, CEO, Alzheimer’s Research UK

T H E C H A R I T Y T I M E S I N T E R V I E W

www.charitytimes.com2 0

T H E C H A R I T Y T I M E S I N T E R V I E W

Prudent investment

The success of these objectives are indeed impressive. Which was

the most difficult? Rebecca Wood, Alzheimer’s Research UK CEo,

reveals: “given continued uncertainty in the economy, and against

the backdrop of many charities experiencing falls in income, our

bold target to increase income was certainly the most ambitious

for the year.

“beating our income target with a 11 per cent increase on

the prior year has been achieved through prudent investment

across the organisation, not only in fundraising, but also in

communications and policy work, so we can work harder for our

donors and make a stronger case for research investment.”

Why in particular then, were these four objectives chosen?

Wood explains: “dementia is our greatest medical challenge,

affecting over 800,000 people today with a greater economic

impact than heart disease and cancer combined. When you’re

dealing with an all-encompassing health issue like this, you

have to be bold and seek to make major steps in improving the

environment for research.

“We are playing catch-up with other disease areas, with

dementia 20-30 years behind cancer both in terms of research

understanding and stigma. We can’t afford to take 30 years to

close the gap, as this period would see dementia become a socio-

economic as well as a medical crisis in the UK.

“We are being ambitious, and our objectives are testament

to that: drive hard for growth to increase our own funding

for research, as well as leveraging a better response from

public funders.”

The charity has also secured major corporate partnerships,

including three consecutive years of support from Iceland foods

worth over £1million per year and making a major contribution to

research. A highly successful corporate partnership team of just

two people have also secured a £200,000 partnership with the

page group, the recruitment specialists, who are funding young

research scientists entering the dementia field. The charity has

also secured successful partnerships with Royal london, pWC,

Nikon UK and Capgemini Consulting.

There are also plans to work with Insight Investment, who are

funding projects around brain imaging and innovative research.

“our corporate fundraising function has gathered pace since its

inception a few years ago. We try to approach partners who share

our ethos of ideas and innovation — both central to effective

dementia research, “says Wood.

“Shortly after we rebranded to Alzheimer’s Research UK in 2011

(from The Alzheimer’s Research Trust) we began working with

Iceland foods who have a philosophy to invest in a charity to

which their contribution could make a meaningful difference.

“As a small but growing charity, Iceland’s year one contribution

of £1.2milion formed a sizeable proportion of our income and has

funded a truly pioneering study into early-onset of Alzheimer’s

disease, affecting people in their 50s, 40s and even 30s.”

Its new Research Strategy, launched in Westminster, won

widespread and cross party support. With Secretary of State

Jeremy Hunt endorsing it at the launch, and Shadow Chancellor

Ed balls, who also spoke at the launch.

The strategy will see the charity concentrate on fast-tracking

research towards patient benefit, help unite academic research

with pharmaceutical industry resources and introduce more

funding partnerships at home and overseas as advised by

its newly formed international scientific advisory board of

international experts.

dementia affects 820,000 people with an economic impact

of over £23bn to the UK, most of which is met by unpaid carers:

husbands, wives and children who struggle to meet the emotional

and care demands that dementia places on their family.

This impact dwarves other serious conditions, posing a

greater cost to the UK than cancer and heart disease combined.

“Twelve times more is spent on cancer, which has brought

real breakthroughs in treatment. our work could not be more

important,” says Wood.

Wood notes that a charity with fewer than 40 members of

staff can have impact scientifically to the benefit of people with

dementia, in its fundraising and through influencing public

spending. “We represent exceptional value for money to our

donors and we believe further growth in this financial year and

subsequent ones is achievable, and we are investing in growth to

achieve this.”

on the big Society, Wood has an interesting angle. “The prime

Minister’s dementia Challenge is an intriguing case study for

the big Society, with big opportunities for the voluntary sector

to help deliver improvements for people with dementia by

working at the heart of government and through engaged

volunteers.” However, she notes, with a carefully worded

caveat: “Any bottom-up collaboration needs to be met with

top-down funding.”

So given such impressive growth, where will future growth

come from? Wood says: “people can expect further big things

from Alzheimer’s Research UK in the coming period, and we have

some big research initiatives to announce in the coming year and

beyond, all of which are focused on delivering benefits to people

living with Alzheimer’s disease and other causes of dementia.

The new projects will provide an opportunity to re-invigorate our

fundraising and push on to the next major milestone.”

dementia, adds Wood, isn’t going away, it is set to increase

as our population continues to age. “our challenge will be to

battle the nihilism around dementia; it isn’t an inevitability of

age, it is caused by diseases that we can and will beat with the

right research. “

www.charitytimes.com 2 1

www.ecclesiastical.com/charityinsurance

ecclesiastical_28october2013.indd 1 10/28/2013 3:28:48 PM

C O R P O R A T E P A R T N E R S H I P S

Corporate Partnerships

24 mAkINg CORPORATE PARTNERSHIPS wORk Corporate partnerships are becoming more

central to the work of sector organisations, but

measuring the impact of the partnership is key,

says Maurice Mcleod

www.charitytimes.com2 4

C O R P O R A T E P A R T N E R S H I P S

The Third sector has historically

been slightly nervous about forming

partnerships with private companies.

There is a fear that companies motivated

by profit might undermine the good work

of their sector partners by damaging the

good reputations so vital to all voluntary

sector organisations.

These concerns troubled civil society

organisations everywhere. In 2009 Stacy

Landreth Grau, associate professor of

marketing at Neeley School of Business

in Texas said on research she had

undertaken: “Our results suggest that

some CSR initiatives may produce

consumer inferences ...[which] can have

potentially negative consequences for

the nonprofit.”

Her study, Donations and Inferred

Endorsements, presented in the Journal of

Advertising found that regardless of the

level of endorsement intended, the public

sees any connection between a non-profit

and a company as

an endorsement of the company.

As the restricted funding environment

has squeezed voluntary organisations, the

benefits of getting access to private sector

money and expertise has largely pushed

these concerns aside and many sector

organisations now see private sector

backing and partnerships as a valuable

part of their funding outlook.

Instead of worrying about being seen

to endorse private firms, many sector

organisations are working more closely

with corporate partners on specific

projects. They are then happy to be seen

to endorse the private firm’s involvement

in the project as they are both heavily

involved in running it.

There are many ways that private

companies can work with voluntary

organisations to improve society.

These include: donations, advertising,

sponsorship and partnership.

All of these engagements are likely to

be part of the corporation’s Corporate

Social Responsibility (CSR) activities.

CSr: a history

For as long as companies have existed,

some have tried to have a positive impact

on the world around them.

In a vibrant and competitive economy,

a company’s brand is vital in attracting

and retaining loyal customers. One way for

firms to enhance their brand is through

their CSR programmes.

Howard Bowen coined the phrase CSR

in his 1953 book, Social Responsibilities of

the Businessman. In it he asked what social

responsibility it was reasonable to expect

business men to take on.

The concept of CSR was discussed

throughout the 70s and 80s but it was

an ice cream company run by a pair of

hippies, Ben & Jerry’s, which in 1989 was

the first to publish a social report into its

CSR activities.

The Ben & Jerry’s Foundation had

been launched four years earlier and had

since been given 7.5% of the company’s

annual pre-tax profits to fund community-

oriented projects.

Ben & Jerry’s was still relatively small

when it published its social report and the

first large company to follow suit was Shell

in 1998.

There are many reasons for companies,

which are set up to make profits, to decide

to spend some of their energy on CSR

projects.

Ben & Jerry’s, for example, was a small

company with socially conscious owners

and so set up a foundation in its first few

years of trading.

Shell on the other hand had recently

been at the centre of international outrage

after the Nigerian government arrested

and hanged Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight

other activists in 1995. Saro-Wiwa and his

colleagues were arrested after protesting

against Shell’s drilling for crude oil in the

Ogoniland area of Nigeria. Investors and

the public temporarily lost the confidence

in the giant oil firm and its share price

plummeted. CSR was seen as a way of

reviving their image.

CSR developed as an industry in its own

right in the 90s with major companies

such as PricewaterhouseCoopers, KPMG

and Burson Marsteller as well as new

organisations entering the CSR service

provision market.

CSR is still an important initiative

which focuses some corporation’s minds

on their social impact. While campaigns

like the CORE Coalition are still pressing

for more legally binding rather than

voluntary regulation, many voluntary

organisations are already working with

the private sector to improve the world

they share.

Making corporate partnerships workCorporate partnerships are becoming more central to the work of sector organisations, but measuring the impact of the partnership is key, says Maurice Mcleod

C O R P O R A T E P A R T N E R S H I P S

2 5www.charitytimes.com

Level of corporate giving

The funds that might come to the

voluntary organisation from its new

corporate partner are likely to be very

important but the expertise and extended

platform that might also be on offer

shouldn’t be overlooked.

In their UK Guide to Company Giving

2013/14, The Directory of Social Change

(DSC) analysed the 550 largest corporate

givers which give the sector a combined

total of £622m per year. This sounds like

a lot but is less than 2 per cent of the UK

voluntary sector’s yearly income. Giving

by the public represents 43 per cent of

the sector’s income and statutory sources

provide 37 per cent.

Comparing the figures the findings with

those from the last edition of the Guide

to UK Company Giving suggested that

total corporate giving had fallen by 27

per cent and cash donations have fallen

by 16 per cent. The proportion of pre-tax

profits given to sector was around 0.4 per

cent overall well below the 1 per cent level

widely taken to the benchmark for CSR.

The report found that Lloyds was the

UK’s top corporate giver, donating £43.8m

in the 2013/14 period. Lloyds also have

been involved in a number of successful

partnerships with voluntary organisations.

Many companies have also been hit by the

recent downturn so partnerships which

involve expertise or in-kind support have

become more attractive.

For these to work well, the values of

the corporation should match those of

the voluntary organisation and both

should value the other’s input. Last year’s

annual C&E Corporate-NGO Partnerships

Barometer found only 42 per cent of

sector respondents agreed that: “NGOs are

considered by companies to be effective,

professional entities with which to do

business.”

Forming partnerships

As shown above, corporate giving is likely

to be very small when compared to public

giving and so organisations need to be

efficient with their time and should be

clear about what they want to achieve by

courting corporate partners.

Developing a long term corporate

partnership can take six months or longer.

NCVO’s Corporate Fundraising Resource

Sheet suggests nine steps to forming a

partnership.

1. Make sure you are clear about

what your organisation has to offer.

This means being clear about your vision

and USP, making sure you know who your

beneficiaries and supporters are.

2. research your prospective partner,

thinking about their needs. Be clear

about what they do, what their vision is,

what values you share, how big they are

and who the decision makers within the

company are.

3. Know what you want to get from

the partnership. Partnerships are about

more than money so decide whether

you are looking for donations, PR,

Payroll Giving, pro bono work, expertise,

volunteering or cause related marketing.

You may be interested in one or all of

these but have a clear goal in mind

before the first meeting and prepare to

be flexible.

4. decide what good the partnership

will deliver. Remember that you are the

experts in your field and so build a social

case, consider what you have achieved so

far and have a clear vision of what can be

This dynamic relationship with KPMG has led to a campaign that is rootedin communities and spreading to the boardroomMatthew Bolton, Citizens UK

2 6 www.charitytimes.com

achieved in the future.

5. Make contact with your prospect.

Speaking to fundraisers who have

brokered similar deals should provide

some ideas about how to first make

contact.

6. if you are dealing with a large

company, there may be a formal

application process in place. This will

give you information about the process,

the types of causes they want to get

involved in and will often provide

guidance for applicants.

7. Work your networks. Word of mouth

is a powerful tool so talk to trustees,

staff and other stakeholders to see if

they already have contacts with suitable

companies.

8. Prepare meticulously for your

first meeting. A lot can rest of the first

meeting with a prospective partner so

make sure you are well prepared and

have thought carefully through all of

the issues above.

9. Keep the momentum up. Once

you have met be sure to keep things

moving. Keep in touch with your contact,

updating them on all progress and, when

appropriate, publicise the partnership.

Of course, the start of the partnership

is not the end of the work. Check in

regularly with your contact, let them

know about any successes and challenges

and think of ways of developing the

partnership in future years.

It is also important to clearly measure

the impact of the partnership as this will

help the CSR team at the corporation to

justify the resources they are investing

with you.

Chris Taylor, NCVO enterprise

development manager, says: “NCVO

engages with corporates on many levels

from straight forward membership and

sponsorship opportunities through to joint

Living Wage

The partners

KPMG is a leading accountancy firm

providing professional services including

audit, tax and advice. Citizens UK is the

home of Community Organising in the UK

and has a strong record of working with

diverse civil society organisations working

to improve the country.

The project

KPMG and Citizens UK have worked

together since 2006, principally around

the Living Wage Campaign; an initiative

of Citizens UK which addresses in-work

poverty.

The campaign sees an hourly rate set

independently and updated annually. The

rate is calculated according to the basic

cost of living in the UK. The campaign

encourages employers to voluntarily sign

up the Living Wage pledge to pay their all

of their staff a wage they can live on.

Paying the Living Wage is good for

business, good for the individual and

good for society.

The results

In 2012 the Living Wage Week was

launched and this achieved more than 750

media items of coverage. The campaign

has so far put £200million into the pockets

of 45,000 low paid workers and enjoys

cross party support with public backing

from both the Prime Minister and the

Leader of the Opposition. So far there are

almost 400 accredited employers. It is

estimated 5 million working people earn

below the living wage, currently set at

£8.30per hour in London and £7.20 in the

rest of the UK.

Matthew Bolton, Citizens UK deputy

director, said: “It’s impossible to overstate

the importance of the Citizens UK

partnership with KPMG in terms of making

the Living Wage mainstream. This dynamic

relationship has led to a campaign that

is both rooted in communities and

also spreading quickly through the

boardrooms.”

it Youth hubs

Partners

UK Youth is a National youth development

charity supporting a network of youth

clubs. Microsoft is a multinational IT giant

run by Bill Gates.

The Project

IT Youth Hubs, an innovative digital

literacy programme, was launched by the

pair in the summer of 2012. 30 youth clubs

were initially supported to become IT

Youth Hubs.

The clubs developed digital technology

skills in young people and trained them to

become peer educators in digital literacy.

The Result

Before and after agreeing to work

together negotiations were even-handed

and fast-moving, with Microsoft staff

demonstrating a real understanding of

how best to support the charitable aims

of UK Youth. After a successful first year,

the scheme will be extended to 35 new

youth clubs in 2014. By next year IT Youth

Hubs will ensure that over 2000 young

people get direct access to IT resources

and knowledge that will help them learn

essential work and life skills.

Dominic Cotton, UK Youth Director

of Communications & Income Generation

said: “The development of our work

with Microsoft has been an authentic

partnership and the results of the

project confirm this. At all points their

staff sought our input and the budgets

and related targets we set were ambitious

but realistic. We are now using the

development of our work with Microsoft

to inform the way we build new corporate

partnerships.”

Forever Fish

Partners

The Marine Conservation Society has

been able to greatly increase and enhance

local involvement and engagement in its

work across the UK through the Forever

Fish partnership with Marks & Spencer.

Funding and practical support from M&S

staff and customers has dramatically

increased volunteer involvement in

its work.

CASe STUdieS

C O R P O R A T E P A R T N E R S H I P S

C O R P O R A T E P A R T N E R S H I P S

The Project

To engage M&S staff and customers in

understanding the importance of the

marine environment. Over the period

of the partnership, the aim was for M&S

customers and staff to become actively

involved in marine conservation activities,

and in particular beach cleans.

The Result

The organisations worked closely

together on two main elements which

enabled MCS to achieve a step change

in local involvement and engagement in

its work across the UK: a Sea Champions

national volunteering programme and

the Big Beach Clean-up. Collectively, these

two elements have almost doubled MCS’

volunteer network from around 10,000

to well over 19,000 people and increased

our outreach capacity and ability to engage

with people at a local level in the UK.

Mike Barry, head of sustainable

business, Marks & Spencer, said: “4,000

M&S employees took part in the M&S Big

Beach Clean-Up in April, our biggest ever

volunteering event. Our partnership with

MCS enables us to engage our colleagues

in an important environmental issue as

well as giving them a good way to spend

a few hours together out of their usual

store and office surroundings. Good for

beaches, good for marine life and good

for business.”

Andy Bool, head of fundraising, at MCS,

added: “The impact of this

partnership on MCS and our

pollution work has been immense.”

demelza hospice Care for Children

Partners

Axis Europe, a property improvement

and maintenance company based in the

South East chose Demelza Hospice Care

for Children as their corporate charity

partner. Demelza provides hospice

services across South East London, Kent

and East Sussex. The partnership aimed

to engage staff and the community in

supporting this regional charity.

The Project

The aims of the partnership were: to

engage employees and encourage

volunteering; to raise funds and

awareness for Demelza; to build teams

and promote an ethos of Axis staff

“putting the fun in fundraising”; to use

corporate skills to benefit the chosen

charity; to engage stakeholders and to

promote staff well being.

The Result

The partnership has allowed Demelza

to employ a new community nurse to

work in an un-tapped area of South

East London. This position has allowed

Demelza to support 20 families in their

own home. This valuable service gives

families, in the community Axis work

in, the choice to receive respite care,

palliative care and end of life care in the

comfort of their own home, 24 hours a day.

Donna Wells, Demelza Hospice Care

for Children corporate partnership

manager, said: “Axis’ funded nurse Emily,

visits children and their families at home

to administer medication, help with

physiotherapy, bring a little fun to the

children or just to be a good listener

for parents, making life a little more

bearable. The on-going support Axis

provides Demelza gives those families

reassurance that the service is there when

they need it.”

Useful links:

• DSC’s Guide to UK Company Giving

2013/14

www.dsc.org.uk/Publications/

Fundraisingsources/@161200

• DSC’s Company Giving Almanac 2013

www.dsc.org.uk/Publications/

Fundraisingsources/@162468

• NCVO’s Corporate Fundraising

Resource Sheet

www.ncvo-vol.org.uk/sites/default/

files/UploadedFiles/Sustainable_

Funding/Funding/corporates.pdf

ventures, such as CaSE Insurance, where

we are working with corporate partners

to bring services to the sector that can

help voluntary organisations save money

and become more efficient and effective.

The most important cornerstones to us

in establishing corporate partnerships

are that they are equitable, honest and

transparent.”

Maurice

Mcleod is

a freelance

journalist

The development of our work with Microsoft has been an authentic partnership and the results confirm thisdominic Cotton, UK Youth

acevo_resized.indd 1 10/29/2013 2:22:48 PM

2 9www.charitytimes.com

Much of what we know — or think

we know — about philanthropy is based

on the 3 ‘A’s: assumptions, anecdotes and

American studies. The idea that there ex-

ists a ‘new philanthropy’ is a good example

of something that is widely assumed to

be true being based more on speculation

and selective examples, rather than on a

reliable evidence base.

Why would anyone make such a claim

without good reason to do so? A ‘prefer-

ence for novelty’ has been noted as a

defining feature of our times because we

assume that if it is new it must be intrinsi-

cally better. Tired products are re-pack-

aged as ‘new and improved’ and political

parties get a fresh lease of life by prefix-

ing the word ‘new’. The opposite of ‘new’

underscores this preference: obsolete, old

fashioned and out of date.

This preference for novelty is at least a

century old: in Thorstein Veblen’s caustic

study of ‘conspicuous consumption’, pub-

lished in 1899, he notes: “A fancy bonnet of

this year’s model unquestionably appeals

to our sensibilities to-day much more

forcibly than an equally fancy bonnet of

the model of last year; although when

viewed in the perspective of a quarter of a

century, it would, I apprehend, be a matter

of the utmost difficulty to award the palm

for intrinsic beauty to the one rather than

to the other of these structures.”

But what have fancy bonnets or ‘new

and improved’ products got to do with

contemporary major donors? The phrase

‘new philanthropy’ emerged towards the

end of the twentieth century and gained

traction over the past decade as interest

grew in understanding the nature and mo-

tives of contemporary philanthropists.

It has a triple meaning — new types of

donors, giving to new types of causes and

using new methods of giving — and is

generally viewed as a change for the bet-

ter, contrasting favourably with the alleg-

edly careless and paternalistic approach

of philanthropic forebears, especially

bewhiskered Victorian industrialists and

do-gooding Lady Bountifuls!

Philanthropic impact

None of this stands up to historical scru-

tiny. Many major donors in the past exhibit

characteristics that are supposed to be

unique to today’s new philanthropists:

being young, entrepreneurial and first-

generation rich: Thomas Guy, Isaac Wolfson

and Joseph Rowntree all fit this description.

Probably the best known British-born

philanthropist, Andrew Carnegie, was self-

made, started giving at a young age and

bypassed existing charitable structures

to set up his own vehicles to tackle the

causes he cared about.

The suggestion that historic donors

didn’t care about impact is equally easily

dismissed: in 1758 the philanthropist Jonas

Hanway resigned as life-governor of the

Foundling Hospital after calculating that it

cost £60 to raise a foundling in the institu-

tion, which was more than twice the £25

needed to raise a child within a family.

The rise of new recipients of philan-

thropic spending is the easiest claim to

substantiate — the emergence of the

environment as a favoured cause and the

Beth Breeze and Theresa Lloyd analyse the history of philanthropy, finding it is not a simple, static activ-ity, with philanthropists open to change

philanthropyReinventing

www.charitytimes.com3 0

P H I L A N T H R O P Y

extended scope of international devel-

opment efforts are a result of scientific

advances and the positive aspects of

globalisation.

But it is easy to overstate this change, as

similar shifts in the focus of philanthropic

attention have occurred throughout his-

tory. Just as climate change and global

health are prevailing concerns at the start

of the 21st century, it was popular to help

poor maids to marry in the 15th century,

to pay ransoms for people captured by

pirates in the 16th century and to make

contributions to rebuild London after the

Great Fire in the 17th century.

As the most urgent social problems

change over time, so too the philanthropic

response alters, as noted in a 1934 book

(called The New Philanthropy’!) by Elizabeth

Macadam: “The worthy citizen of the eight-

eenth century relieved his conscience by a

gift to an orphanage; the benevolent lady

of the nineteenth century distributed soup

and blankets. Her daughter ‘taught the

orphan boy to read and the orphan girl to

sew’; her grand-daughter went ‘slumming’.

The twentieth-century lady is on the com-

mittee of the village institute; her daughter

is a guide captain and her son helps at an

unemployment centre”

In our recently published book, Richer

Lives: why rich people give we present an

in-depth study of why and how the richer

members of our society give away their

private wealth. We explore the question of

‘the ‘newness’ of ‘new philanthropy’ and

conclude that those making significant

donations in the second decade of the

21st century cannot be characterized as

any ‘newer’ than philanthropists in any

other era.

Myths of old & new

The role of philanthropy and philanthro-

pists has been continually re-invented to

reflect contemporary needs, dominant

values, available wealth, technological

developments, new forms of financing and

tax structures and the broader socio-polit-

ical context. In other words, philanthropy

cannot be divided into ‘old’ and ‘new’ but is

always evolving as a product of its time.

However, we are able to make compari-

sons between the older and younger do-

nors operating today, as our study involved

revisiting rich donors last interviewed in

2002 (the findings of which were pub-

lished in Why Rich People Give by Theresa

Lloyd) as well as adding a new cohort of

donors, with a younger age profile, who

we first interviewed a decade later in 2012.

This research design creates a unique

opportunity for a longitudinal study of

UK philanthropists, which will be revisited

again in 2022, 2032 and so on – a sort of

‘ten up’ of the philanthropy world!

So what are the key messages from

the 2012 update? Consistent with our

argument that there is no sharp divide

between philanthropy in different eras,

we find more similarities than differences

between our two groups:

Philanthropy is a very important aspect

of the lives of both younger and older

donors

Over a quarter of all our interviewees

rated the importance of philanthropy in

their lives as ‘10’ on a scale of 1-10 and,

encouragingly for the future, the belief

that philanthropy is of growing impor-

tance was ten percentage points higher

amongst emerging or newer donors.

Whilst many of our interviewees reported

instances of feeling unappreciated and

unfairly criticised for their giving — nota-

bly having their motives questioned, but

also their choice of causes — overall, they

sense that the political and cultural climate

for giving in the UK has improved over the

past decade.

Donors give because it enriches their

lives

Philanthropic acts are motivated by a

complex array of factors, including differ-

ent drivers for the same donor giving to

different causes at different times. But the

one shared motivation is that it is a means

of enriching donors’ lives in many ways.

These include feelings of satisfaction at

using their private wealth to support the

causes they care about; the enjoyment of

having unusual experiences and develop-

ing relationships with interesting people

working in charities, as well as fellow

donors and beneficiaries; the opportunity

to integrate giving into their social life and

retirement activities; and the beneficial

impact on their family, as a way of sharing

values across the generations and leaving

a meaningful legacy beyond a simple sum

of money.

Philanthropy is not a simple, static

activity and philanthropists are open to

change

Despite a widespread view of philanthropy

as a straightforward, unchanging activity

and the tendency to pigeonhole donors

into ‘types’ (such as ‘driven by religious

belief’ or ‘focused on local causes’), these

simplifications sit uncomfortably with the

reality of a complex, ever-changing sphere

of activity populated by donors who are

open to new ideas about how to best use

their private wealth for the public good.

This book charts a widespread concern

with being strategic, a desire to focus on

underlying problems rather than symp-

toms, and a willingness to be more open

about giving. These trends are aligned with

new approaches and mechanisms, includ-

ing social investment, venture philan-

thropy and taking up professional advice

(though a willingness to pay for advice

is more common amongst the younger

donors). At the same time, we see renewed

interest in old ideas such as tithing, giving

anonymously and collaborative giving.

The end of the armchair philanthropist

Almost all those who give substantial

amounts of money also give substantial

amounts of time. Donors want to be

involved with the cause they are supporting,

though the level of engagement varies

from donor to donor and from cause to

cause, and changes over time, depending

on their other commitments. The desire for

involvement may create new pressures for

time-stretched charities, but project visits

(‘seeing is believing’) can create a virtuous

cycle of deeper commitment that leads to

more donations.

fundraising is improving but needs the

input of donors as askers

The donors we studied feel that fundraising

3 1www.charitytimes.com

has become more professional over the

past decade, especially in terms of the

right research being conducted before ap-

proaches are made, and fundraisers having

a better understanding of how different

donors might want to engage with causes.

However, donors want to have relationships

with the charity chief executive and the

trustees, not just the fundraisers, and

believe that sizable donations ought to

create access to the charity leadership.

Fundraisers also need more support

from major donors. While many major

donors do get involved in asking, a sizable

proportion (especially of newly emerging

philanthropists) have never asked others

to give. This needs to change, given the

importance attached to being asked by

someone known and trusted by the

potential donor, and the role of peer

pressure in securing a positive response.

Why do rich people give?

In addition to the importance of being

asked well, by the right person, at the right

time, our study offers ten further answers

to the question incorporated in the book’s

title: ‘who do rich people give’?

The original 2002 study identified 5 driv-

ers behind the giving of wealthy people:

1. Because they believe in the cause,

usually as a result of a personal encounter,

such as ill health or proximity to a social

problem. The affinity between the donor

and the cause underpins and reinforces

their enthusiasm.

2. Because they want to be a catalyst

for change and make something good

happen that would not have occurred

without their input.

3. Because philanthropy helps them

to develop as a person by gaining new

knowledge or putting skills to work in a

new context.

4. Because they feel a duty and respon-

sibility to share their wealth; despite its old

fashioned connotations, the concept of

noblesse oblige is alive and well.

5. Because they enjoy the relationships

that develop with the charity leadership,

with fellow donors and with the beneficiaries

Ten years on, we find these five factors

remain in place as key drivers of giving, but

we also identify five further explanations

for why rich people choose to give away

some of their private wealth to promote

the public good:

1. Because they believe philanthropy

is the right use of surplus money. Most

people we spoke to were worth at least

£10m and had large incomes on top of

that wealth, so by any definition they have

some to spare. Whilst we argue that the

main reason some rich people do not give

is because they feel financially insecure

(however irrational that may be), our inter-

viewees had a more accurate sense of their

surplus and a desire to put it to good use.

2. Because they are clear about the

complementary roles of government and

philanthropy. There are many varied views

about what should be funded by private

individuals and what is the responsibility

of the state, but drawing a clear line allows

donors to focus on funding what feels

right and appropriate to them.

3. Because they believe philanthropy

is a good parenting tool. The vast majority

of our interviewees have children (89 per

cent) and many talked about their off-

spring when discussing their philanthropy

— both in terms of involving them in fund-

ing decisions and in terms of choosing

philanthropy as a better alternative to

an over-large inheritance.

4. Because they appreciate appropriate

recognition, despite awareness that it can

fuel critics who see giving as driven more

by ego than by generosity, Many of our

interviewees felt that public appreciation

– such as awards, naming opportunities

and honours - was an enjoyable ‘bonus’.

This view was held more strongly by

established or older donors, one of whom

explained: “It’s not an improper motive.

There’s nothing wrong with wanting to be

recognised as a good guy”.

5. Because they get joy out of giving. The

final and most important reason why rich

people give is refreshingly simple: without

exception, the people we spoke to give

because in some way it enriches their life

to do so.

The book goes into more detail on all

the points summarised above, but we give

the last word here to one of the many rich

donors who spoke of the richer life they

lead as a philanthropist:“I always say that

philanthropy makes you feel good, and

I don’t mean goody-goody two shoes,

righteously good, but it just makes you

feel good inside. You get a buzz.”

Dr Beth Breeze is director, centre for

Philanthropy, the university of Kent.

Theresa Lloyd is a philanthropy expert

and consultant in strategic planning,

fundraising and governance for charities

The most important reason why rich people give is refreshingly simple: because in some way, it enriches their life to do so Beth Breeze & Theresa Lloyd

www.charitytimes.com2 6

K E Y I T T R E N D S

Technologicalengagement

Antony Savvas says charities are approaching the opportunities offered by new technology with caution, but they shouldn’t be put off from testing the water

3 3

Charities are often seen as IT

laggards when it comes to adopting the

new systems and practices that promise

to improve operational efficiency and cut

costs, but is the third sector making any

progress on the IT front?

In business IT the hottest areas are cloud

computing, mobile, social networking,

and data analytics. All these segments,

according to the hype, promise ways

of working that allow organisations to

increase productivity and cut costs.

Cloud computing allows organisations

to move from capital expenditure (Capex)

to operational expenditure (Opex) and

save into the bargain, by not having high

fixed costs for systems that are not used

to capacity.

Cloud computing does this by allowing

organisations to use applications and

services through a scalable and on-

demand basis.

Need some extra servers to handle your

increasing data demands? Well don’t buy

them and the software that runs on them,

instead hire the capacity and software you

need from a cloud provider, that will host

the hardware and applications in their own

data centre for when you need them.

The same goes for desktop productivity

software. Instead of using something like

the Microsoft Office suite installed on

every computer, why not use Microsoft

Office 365 or Google Apps for instance,

hosted in the software supplier’s own

data centre.

Not only is this way of working

cheaper, it allows your staff to use those

applications on any desktop, laptop, tablet

or smartphone wherever and whenever

they like.

There are of course connectivity and

security issues when using the cloud

and these concerns show up in every

business survey of companies and other

organisations when measuring actual

cloud take up.

If a charity connects to the data centre

of a cloud provider to get a service, it will

usually be that charity that is responsible

for making sure the network they use is up

to scratch with the right bandwidth, to get

those applications and services from the

cloud provider before distributing them

to their users.

Some applications take up more

bandwidth than others and if the network

is not configured in the right way, then

users will experience frustrating delays in

downloading apps and completing tasks.

And with security, even if strong

systems are in place at a charity there is no

guarantee that the security is as good at

the cloud service provider. Cloud security

is an end-to-end process so all cloud

customers have to ask the right questions

about data security and service level

agreements (SLAs), to make sure data leaks

don’t happen at their cloud provider and

the risk of a service outage is kept to

a minimum.

Cloud benefits

Social welfare law and technology charity

Lasa recently surveyed nearly 160 charities

and not-for-profit organisations in the UK

about the use of cloud technology.

The research confirmed there was a

perceived lack of security with cloud

services, which was proving to be an

important factor for slow cloud take-up

in the sector. Maybe this isn’t surprising

considering many charities hold a consider-

able amount of sensitive information

about their service users and donors.

But respondents were also asked to

highlight what benefits they thought the

cloud offers. The vast majority (84 per

cent) suggested that being able to access

information and data from anywhere

with an internet connection was a key

advantage. There was also the perception

that the cloud could save time and money.

Lasa chief executive Terry Stokes

says: “When charities make the most of

technology it means better services for

the people they support. Although many

cloud applications are low cost, funding

cuts mean charity workers don’t feel they

have time to try new things.”

But, he adds: “Despite the pressures of

the recession, charities need to make the

most of the resources they have to provide

the best services to their clients.”

Peter Chadha, founder of DrPete, which

www.charitytimes.com3 4

K E Y I T T R E N D S

is involved in IT project work at various

charities, says the savings that can come

through the cloud can reach as much

as 80 percent, mainly through lower

infrastructure costs and cheaper software.

Chadha says: “The cloud is an

absolutely amazing opportunity for

charities. Normally charity IT budgets

are constrained and the hardware and

software put in consequently suffers. But

with the cloud there is a much more level

playing field, because hardware resources

and software updates are all centralised

and managed by external companies that

have scale.”

He says: “The likes of Microsoft, Amazon,

Google, Rackspace and countless others

ensure that charities do not need to have

the IT expertise which was once required,

and neither do they need to invest in

huge data centres, or have massive capital

expenditure costs to get good systems.”

With the cloud, he says, charities with

distributed and remote offices both

in the UK and around the world, can

genuinely communicate and work as one

organisation with vastly reduced costs,

as many of the systems essentially rely on

just an internet connection.

Big Data and analytics

A buzz term across government, the

public sector and business is Big Data. It

covers the vast amounts of data generated

by organisations in emails, databases,

spreadsheets and documents, and the

challenge it poses in gleaning the best

bits to improve operations, in terms of

sales leads, marketing, research and other

intellectual capital.

It’s something that Medway Youth Trust,

which tackles youth unemployment, has

focused on in particular.

Graham Clewes, CEO at Medway

Youth Trust, says: “In our experience, the

digitisation of charities is about cultural

change within an organisation rather than

the implementation of an IT programme.

“The first step is to be clear about

initial goals for the work and to ensure

that all staff are part of the journey and

are involved. It must not be something

that originates and happens in an IT

department somewhere. This requires

engagement and sponsor-ship from the

senior level and I don’t think this is any

different in the commercial sector.”

The importance of Big Data has not

been lost on the UK government.

It recently opened its Open Data

Institute in “Tech City”, east London.

The Institute, whose

founders include Sir Tim

Berners-Lee, the “father of

the web”, have assembled

a team to help the public

sector and business

identify commercially

valuable public data that

can be efficiently shared over

the cloud.

The UK government

is working with the Institute

to make data more readily available and

accessible and to maximise its potential

for stimulating growth. The government

is already commmitted to releasing

key open datasets on health, transport,

weather and welfare.

The government has already released

thousands of datasets which companies,

the public sector, charities and non-profits

can access to help run their operations.

social networking

The requirement to use social net-working

is now a given in any organisation, and

many charities have less catching up to

do than in other areas, it seems.

Blackbaud, a software and IT services

firm for the charitable sector, recently

published research in the area.

It found that 80 percent of non-profit

organisations used social media of some

sort over the past year, with Facebook (87

per cent) and Twitter (84 per cent) the

most popular for communicating with

supporters.

Martin Campbell, Blackbaud Europe’s

director of strategy and innovation, says,

“Social networks are where people share

information and chat with their network

of contacts, so are not only an effective

way for charities to raise overall awareness

and help with fundraising, but also a

powerful way for event organisers to drive

participation and engage supporters.”

the cloud is an amazing opportunity for charities: there is a much more level playing field, because hardware resources are all centralised Peter Chadha, DrPete

3 5www.charitytimes.com

Natasha North, marketing manager of

Pancreatic Cancer Action, says, “Pancreatic

Cancer Action is very active on social

media. Currently, we’re looking at tools like

Hootsuite to help us manage the various

channels available and improve our

presence online.

“As well as being a cost-effective way

to spread the word about the charity

with our marketing activity, it also helps

us keep in contact with supporters and

fundraisers.”

Hootsuite, Falcon Social and other

social media management tools from the

likes of Google, Salesforce and Oracle, are

increasingly necessary for organisations

to use to get a full handle on their social

media presence and success.

They can be used for instance to quickly

discover and react to any bad publicity

about the organisation on a social

network, and chart how problems are

addressed and rectified in response.

Mobile tech

On mobile, Blackbaud’s Campbell says,

“The rise of social networks is also a major

factor in why not-for-profits must get their

mobile strategy correct.

“Facebook recently released its number

of daily users in the UK for the first time,

and the figures revealed that four out

of five of the 24 million Britons who log

onto Facebook each day, do so using a

smartphone or tablet computer.”

With so many people using Facebook

via their mobile it stands to reason that

any not-for-profit Facebook pages have

to be mobile-optimised to ensure the

message reaches the intended audience.

Cambell says: “Our research shows

nearly half of not-for-profits surveyed

can now facilitate mobile SMS-giving, but

mobile needs to go much further — emails

and web pages must be mobile-optimised

to help create a truly mobile experience

for supporters.”

But charities shouldn’t beat themselves

over the head about a lack of progress

here. Recent research from the Internet

Advertising Bureau UK reveals that just 11

of the UK’s 100 highest spending online

advertisers — very large companies

— now have websites designed to

automatically display content in the most

appropriate way, for whichever device a

consumer is using.

Called “responsive design”, such content

is optimised to reflect whether a consumer

is using a PC, laptop, tablet or smartphone

to visit a website.

Getting the online content right

The value of charities getting content right

is plain to see, even though large compa-

nies are struggling to do it. UK charities

could generate £35.5 million more if they

provided “better online engagement” with

the public, according to research from

YouGov.

The research revealed that 17 per

cent of 2,000 consumers questioned

would donate up to £15 more per

month if a charity provided a more

personal approach via their website

or email.

This could include remembering which

content has been seen on the website,

viewing preferences (“responsive design”)

and charity campaigns of interest.

“Consumers increasingly expect good

online interaction with websites because

the likes of Amazon have done it so well,”

says Haylie Oriot, charity sector manager

at Eduserv, the non-profit public and third

sector IT provider, which commissioned

the research.

“Genuinely good web engagement,

which understands a donor’s previous

interactions and uses this information

to provide a more bespoke experience,

has yet to take off in the charity sector,”

says Oriot.

Many charities are approaching the

opportunities offered by new technology

with understandable caution, but as most

of it is online now, they must realise there

is a more level playing field when it comes

to adoption, so they shouldn’t be put off

from testing the water in all areas.

antony savvas is a freelance journalist

Medway Youth Trust is using business

analytics software from Tableau Software.

The Trust is using Tableau dashboards

to analyse structured and unstructured

data from a variety of sources, so it can

identify those most at risk of becoming

unemployed before they leave

compulsory education.

By using Tableau dashboards, Medway

Youth Trust has been able to link

information from a number of different

data sources, including management

systems in schools and colleges.

This is used to map the path of young

people from the age of 12 through to

those in their late teens or early

twenties. Advisers can use this data

to assess the risk each young person

faces of becoming unemployed,

which means that interventions are

more timely and restricted financial

resources are more targeted.

As a local authority contractor, the

Trust therefore understand who needs

help, when they need it and where those

most in need are located.

Gary Seaman, head of business

analytics at Medway Youth Trust,

says: “Before Tableau we used bar

graphs and charts in Excel spreadsheets.

However, the problem was that

much of the data our advisers relied

upon was unstructured historical

information. As it was in free text form

it was difficult to reconcile with the

Excel format.”

Seaman continues: “Using Tableau

to draw data from both structured and

unstructured sources has allowed our

advisers to completely visualise the

progress of young people.

“As a result, our advisers are able to

visually map the progress of specific

cases and our management team is

able to better monitor performance.”

MeDway youth trust taCkles BiG Data ChallenGe

T O T A L R E T U R N

www.charitytimes.com3 6

From January the Charity

Commission is going to allow endowed

charities to choose a total return

investment approach without having to

seek special permission. This is a welcome

change, which the Commission has been

consulting on since an amendment to the

law earlier this year.

Adopting a total return strategy

means charities will be able to ask

their fund manager to generate a

specific level of income, but the

money they receive won’t have to

be produced as ‘natural’ and fluctuating

income from interest and dividends

alone. Instead, a charity’s income

requirements can be met not just

from interest and dividends, but

from capital growth as well.

This is all total return is – the

combination of all sources of return,

which is then accessed in full or

part through capital drawdown. The

instruction to ‘Keep off the capital’ is

being relaxed and with it an obligation

that is increasingly more difficult to

meet in the current environment of low

rates. If charities are willing to embrace

this shift in emphasis, they may give

themselves a much better chance of

meeting both their current and future

obligations.

In search of yield

The past was kind to the income seeker.

History might tell you that a yield of 4-5

per cent a year was both desirable and

achievable, and this is often referred to

as an expectation when I speak to clients.

History also tells us that the return from

cash was around 3-3.5 per cent. But today

the reality is somewhat different. The

world has moved on, central banks have

seen to that, but it is taking some time

to sink in with investors.

The plots the yield on 10-year UK

Freedom from constraint

Oliver Wallin argues that a switch to total return mandates could give charities a more effective way of managing risk

In association with

government bonds, or gilts, since 1900.

There are a couple of things to draw

from it.

Firstly, current yields are historically

low following a steep and steady decline,

and are now hardly keeping pace with

inflation.

But 4 per cent yields were available only

five years ago.

The second is that for more than

30 years we have experienced a bull

run in gilt prices, which has resulted in

ever-declining yields, a trend accentuated

by recent monetary intervention. The

result is significant risk to capital when

yields eventually begin to rise, as we

have seen in recent months.

All in all, it’s not a particularly compelling

case for investing in gilts at the moment,

but the yields on corporate bonds have

not been much more impressive — with

interest rates at their current rock-bottom

levels, companies simply don’t need to

pay much above gilts to raise money on

the markets.

Yield seekers are, intentionally or

unwittingly, being directed towards

higher-risk asset classes, such as

junk bonds, emerging market debt,

infrastructure and equities in a bid to

deliver on their yield expectations — the

so-called reach for yield.

This is creating its own issues, with

spreads narrowing and investors not

really being rewarded for the risk they

are being asked to take on.

We’re in an environment where the

Rwandan government can borrow money

from the markets, for the first time, at

6.75 per cent. In such a market investors

need to do one of two things: lower their

yield expectations or change the delivery

mechanism of that yield.

Greater diversification

If trustees are comfortable to draw

down from capital, a much broader

universe opens up, one that offers greater

diversification and associated risk benefits

as well as enhanced opportunities to

deliver long-term real returns.

There will be less reliance on a handful

of predominantly UK-based asset classes

such as gilts and UK corporate debt and,

importantly, less reliance on the individual

companies in the UK stockmarket that

provide the bulk of the dividends paid

out of by the FTSE.

BP’s decision to suspend its dividend for

a year, in the wake of the Gulf of Mexico

disaster, had a major impact on income

portfolios of all shapes and sizes.

A further advantage is that it can give

investors access to the likes of Apple,

a strong company in spite of its poor

dividend history.

The key point to remember is that

the aim with a total return approach

is to sell some of the growth an

investment has achieved, not necessarily

the capital (although that may have to

be done in years when growth has

been negative).

The total return mandate allows the

focus to rest on long-term real returns and

efficient risk management.

Effective budgeting

Total return enables the trustees to

budget more effectively, because they can

specify the amount of funding they require

each year. They can also determine the

frequency — likely to be a very valuable

benefit.

In short, a total return approach could

free many charities from an artificial

constraint and allow them to manage

their investment risk in whatever way

they decide is best for their particular

organisation.

oliver Wallin is investment director at

octopus Investments

CaF Financial Solutions works with a

number of different fund management

houses including octopus Investments

to provide funds and services that are

specifically designed to meet the needs

of the sector.

Visit: www.cafonline.org/investments

a total return approach could free many charities from an artificial constraint and allow them to manage their investment risk in whatever way they decideoliver Wallin, octopus Investments

T O T A L R E T U R NIn association with

www.charitytimes.com 3 7

www.charitytimes.com3 8

T O T A L R E T U R N

nEW lEGISlatIon means that

trustees of permanently endowed trusts

will be able to adopt a total return

approach to investment without seeking

prior permission from the Commission,

from January 2014.

For charities with permanent

endowment, a total return approach

means that all investment returns received

are treated as a whole, and not labelled

as either capital or income as they would

usually be. The trustees of charities which

adopt the new power will be able to

allocate the total return in the way they

think will best further their charity’s aims

now and in the future.

Jane Hobson, head of policy at

the Charity Commission, says: “The

Commission promotes the effective use

of charitable resources by encouraging

charities to be self-reliant – letting charities

make decisions which they are best able

to make. We think that the new legislation

and the regulations will contribute to

giving trustees the freedom to act in the

best interests of their charity.”

The phrase ‘total return’ is commonly

known as the measure of the income and

capital return achieved in a year, derived

from an investment portfolio. However,

in more recent times it also relates to

the distribution policy that indicates the

level of pay out based on the total market

value of the investments, rather than just

spending the natural income.

Charity investors seeking to balance

equity holdings in an aggressive investment

portfolio with a more stable investment

option should consider the Total Return

strategy. History has shown that there is

a relatively low correlation between the

equity and fixed income markets.

One of the arguments is that charity

investors that don’t use total return tend to

focus too much on income at the expense

of long-term capital growth. Total return

usually enables foundations to spend

more on grants.

James Brennan, Rathbones business

development director, says: “Endowed

charities have typically only spent their

income; whereas most charities will spend

a mix of both income and capital, as and

when appropriate.

“Here they are more concerned with

the overall Total Return figure rather than

whether x has come from income and y

from capital growth. So they have a little

more freedom when setting budgets

and creating spending plans for the

financial year.”

Brennan endorses the idea that

using a total return approach provides

charities with a wider opportunity set:

in terms of the assets they can invest

in. “Growth assets such as shares in

technology businesses often provide

little or no income and then there are

defensive assets such as Gold that pay

no income whatsoever.”

Brennan adds though, with a total

return approach: “One of the things to bear

in mind is that the overall return can vary

significantly from year-to-year and can

be a negative number, as many charities

discovered in 2008, so a balance has to be

struck between this year’s demands and

the future needs of beneficiaries.

“So some charities may only dip into

capital in better years; or seek to build up

some sort of reserve over time and your

investment manager should be able to

assist you with this.”

Ruadhri Duncan, senior associate

partner, charities, at Sarasin & Partners,

adds: “Many charities operate a total

return approach but it is important that

charities ensure they have the investment

powers to spend their capital, that is, not

permanently endowed, prior to embarking

upon a total return strategy.”

Duncan notes that when setting out

upon a total return policy trustees must

decide on the figure that they wish to

spend prior to the reporting period and

preferably implement a long-term (5

year plus) plan. This is in line with the US

endowment model, who have to spend 5

per cent a year, which has operated on this

basis for some time.

The determinant of distribution policy

under a total return approach is no longer

the income received during the year, but a

consistently applied distribution formula

that will allow for sustainability of the

portfolio over the long-term. “One of the

key benefits of following a total return

approach is the ability to control the

level of distribution whatever natural

level of income the portfolio generates,”

adds Duncan.

Newreturn

Andrew Holt looks at the benefits of following a total return approach

In association with

1343E_CAF-Investments_Waffle-Ad_CharityTimes_211013.indd 1 21/10/2013 15:11:01

Charity Times has teamed-up with CharityJOB, the most popular specialist recruitment website in the voluntary sector.

Together we will bring you all the latest charity and not-for-profit management vacancies at the click of a mouse.

Find your next management job at

www.charitytimes.com

In partnership with

charity_job.indd 1 10/29/2013 3:11:28 PM

Awards Gala Dinner and Ceremony,16 October 2013, Lancaster London Hotel, Hyde Park

W i n n e r s B r o c h u r e

Gold Sponsors In Association with Media Partner

www.charitytimes.com/awards

2013 Charity Times Awards Winners...

The 2013 charity Times Awards were

celebrated in october at a glittering and

sector leading event in London attended by

over 700 of the sector’s most senior people.

Winner of the charity of the Year with and

income of more than £10million was royal

British Legion industries, which the judges said

was: “A fantastic example of quality, excellence,

passion, commitment and dedication.” highly

commended was Victim support: “An excellent

example of hard worked campaigning meeting

the needs of its beneficiaries.” Also highly

commended was concern universal: “evidence

of long-term impact by helping communities

deliver real, practical solutions.”

The winner of charity of the Year: with and

income between £1million and £10million

was Alzheimer’s research uK which was a

“Tremendous evidence of a record income,

advances in research and winning major support

from government.”

highly commended was Living streets which:

“showed great growth in its aims of influence,

impact and income.”

The charity of the Year: with an income of less

than £1million winner was Yorkshire MesMAc,

which was described by the judges as: “A very

thoughtful, innovative approach, with an

amazingly impressive impact.”

highly commended in this category was Bag

Books which was expressed as: “A simple but

highly effective approach with a huge reach.”

Best new charity winner was street Games

uK: “An outstanding project to engage young

people in sporting activity ‘on their doorstep’:

reaching a real diverse range of disadvantaged

young people.”

highly commended in this category was

The cybersmile Foundation, which the judges

said: “Deserves special praise as a new charity

to combat cyber-bullying, set-up and run by

volunteers who themselves have been affected

and using innovative methods.”

outstanding individual Achievement winner

was Paul richard Baron, overseas projects

implementation manager, Bhagavat educational

Trust: “An amazing multilayered and passionate

contribution to British and european civil

society.”

highly commended was clive stafford

smith, founder and director, reprieve: “A very

impressive record having impacted on hundreds

of lives in the sector and global society.”

named as rising ceo star was Kate Lee, chief

executive, Myton hospices, who showed: “clear

top quality leadership is evident through some

fantastic success in the organisation’s growth

and new, highly innovative developments

throughout the charity. A clear rising sector star.”

highly commended was sonal shah, who the

judges thought showed: “excellent leadership is

highlighted in an impressive increase in income

and obvious passion.”

Fundraising Team of the Year Winner was

Action Against hunger: “An amazing example of

fundraising as its very best.”

charity Principal of the Year winner was henny

Braund, chief executive, Anthony nolan: “clear

evidence of inspirational leadership, a doubling

of income, and developing an ambitious strategy

to double the number of lives saved.”

highly commended was Dr Denise Barrett-

Baxendale, chief executive, everton in the

community.

campaigning Team of the Year winner was the

British heart Foundation.

There were two highly commended: firstly

was crisis and the second was Body & soul.

The Best use of the Web winner was refuge:

Don’t cover it up. highly commended was send

a cow: Lessons from Africa.

Pr Team of the Year winner was Muscular

Dystrophy campaign – Trailblazers.

highly commended was Battersea Dogs &

cats home.

The international charity Award went to

Muslim Aid.

The hr Management Award winner was

Diabetes uK. highly commended was Addaction

Financial management award winner was The

British school of osteopathy.

social investment initiative winner was

Golden Lane housing.

The Big society Award Winner was Forever

Manchester.

The Fundraising Technology Award went to

Plumpy nut challenge/Merlin.

The corporate community Local involvement

Winner was Demelza hospice care for children/

Axis europe.

corporate national Partnership champion

was uK Youth/ Microsoft uK. highly commended

here was Wallace & Gromit/Pasta King.

corporate national Partnership of the Year

with a retailer winner was Marine conservation

society/Marks & spencer.

corporate national Partnership of the Year

with a Financial institution winner was citizens

uK/KPMG.

cross-sector Partnership of the Year Winner

was Brain Tumour society/cBTrc university of

nottingham, rcPch, health Foundation.

highly commended in this category was

London citizens/ Mayor of London.

corporate social responsibility Project of the

Year winner was cancer research/nivea sun.

highly commended was British red cross/ Land

rover.

Best use of Technology winner was royal

hospital for neuro-disability: #TechnologyMeans.

The social champion Award winner went to:

Big issue invest. highly commended was Anchor

house.

The investment Management Award went to

schroder charities.

Boutique investment Management winner

was Quilter cheviot

And the consultancy of the Year winner was

Broadway’s real People.

www.charitytimes.com/awards

Charity Times Awards 2013

WINNERS

charity of the Year: with an income of less than £1 millionYorkshire MESMAC

charity of the Year: with an income between £1 million and £10 millionAlzheimer’s Research UK

charity of the Year with an income of more than £10 millionRoyal British Legion Industries

outstanding individual AchievementPaul Richard Baron, Overseas Projects Implementation Manager, Bhagavat Educational Trust

www.charitytimes.com/awards

rising ceo starKate Lee, Chief Executive, Myton Hospices

Fundraising Team of the YearAction Against Hunger

charity Principal of the YearHenny Braund, Chief Executive, Anthony Nolan

campaigning Team of the YearBritish Heart Foundation

www.charitytimes.com/awards

in the current economic environment, to

survive is an achievement for charities, but

to keep growing as a new charity year-on-year

is outstanding. streetGames has done just that.

Through its network, streetGames delivers pro-

jects for young people in the 20% most disad-

vantaged communities of the uK to participate

in regular sports and exercise sessions. it offers

opportunities for those young people to volun-

teer, gain qualifications and become the future

sports leaders of their communities, which

ensures the projects become self-sustaining.

streetGames was established in 2007 to

redress the imbalance in sporting opportunities

for young people between those in disadvan-

taged communities of the uK and their more

affluent counterparts. Young people are given

the opportunity to play regular, organised sport

and to develop into coaches and sports leaders

of their own communities. using its Doorstep

sport approach, streetGames offers multi-sport

sessions. The key objectives focus on: providing

sustainable, positive opportunities for young

people in disadvantaged areas and improving

the quality of their lives. equally important was

that a community’s own capacity to provide and

lead sport in the area had to grow organically,

not simply rely on present funding levels which

might diminish in the future. hence the need

to encourage today’s participants to volunteer,

train, gain qualifications and become the project

leaders of tomorrow through The co-operative

streetGames Young Volunteers (csYV) pro-

gramme. The streetGames network has expand-

ed from 5 to 250 projects in six years. since 2007

these projects have collectively: provided over

100,000 sports sessions; attracted over 240,000

participants; and generated over 2.4 million at-

tendances. The csYV volunteers have given over

167,602 hours to their local community (as of

June 2013). Taking the national minimum wage

development rate of £4.83 per hour for the 18-

21 age group, that equates to £750,000 worth of

coaching and sports delivery in disadvantaged

communities of the uK since 2007. There have

been huge social benefits: in 2012, streetGames

north Tyneside reduced anti-social behaviour by

45% in one of the local parks. There were around

60 young people hanging around at evening

time, some as young as 11 drinking alcohol, so

the local project delivered activities including

tennis, rounders and street Golf. The young

people embraced the sports sessions and the

numbers of those hanging around came down

steeply. The streetGames Training Academy was

founded in 2011 to harness new ways of

educating community sports leaders and vol-

unteers to produce high-quality coaches whilst

overcoming the challenges faced by those with

a poor previous experience of formal education.

Many csYV volunteers fall into this category.

in devising this radically different approach to

educating coaches, streetGames listened to

community leaders, experienced coaches within

deprived neighbourhoods and young people

to gain a proper understanding of current

practice, what is needed and what is wanted.

of 182 qualifications sought up to March 2013,

178 were completed and certified. This was

achieved because we paid particular attention

to pastoral care, an aspect of coach education

often overlooked. The csYV programme target

was to engage 3,000 volunteers by December

2012. This was achieved nearly two years early.

By December 2012, a total of 6,110 young

people from disadvantaged communities have

volunteered through the csYV programme. By

participating in streetGames projects young

people from disadvantaged communities are

given guidance, skills and qualifications to help

them better prepare for a positive career in the

future – 64% of young people who were neeT

before engaging in the csYV programme have

been supported into employment, education or

further training.

Best new charity: StreetGames

Charity Times Awards 2013

WINNERS

www.charitytimes.com/awards

in a strong shortlist of top class investment

expertise, the charity Times Awards judges

said of the investment management winners,

schroders charities: “The longevity in providing

services to charities, the rigour of their process

and excellent performance in the last year is

highly evident.”

indeed, schroders charities has been

managing assets for charity clients for

over 75 years and its first appointment from

the sector remains a client today. schroders

has assets totalling £3.7bn on behalf of 355

charities, foundations and endowments

spanning a broad range of charitable

purposes.

The specialist schroders charities team

of twelve investment professionals and

administrative support has combined investment

experience of over 100 years and is committed

to delivering strong investment returns and

excellent service to all its clients.

schroders charities has a broad product

range, from low risk cash deposits through

their cash Management service to longer-term

investment portfolios which cover all asset

classes.

Portfolios can be tailored to individual charity

requirements through investments in

a range of in-house and third-party pooled

funds or can be invested in one of three specialist

common investment Funds (ciF) – charity equity

Fund, charity Fixed interest Fund and charity

Multi-Asset Fund. indeed, for larger clients,

schroders offer more customised management

to include investment in direct equities.

By offering bespoke discretionary investment

services and the opportunity to invest directly

in specialist multi-asset products, schroders

is able to cater to charities with as little as

£1,000 to invest and with different liquidity

requirements.

The schroders charities flagship ciF, the

charity Multi-Asset Fund has been given

4 star rating by the Morningstar rating agency.

The fund is currently valued at £299m on

behalf of 181 charities and is one of the few

designed specifically for charities looking to

protect the real value of their capital for the

long-term whilst generating a sustainable

income to support current activities. This

fund aims to deliver inflation plus returns

over the long term and equity-like returns

with two thirds of the volatility. it has achieved

this second aim since launch.

schroders has a socially responsible invest-

ment policy that ensures that environmental

and social issues are considered when making

an investment in any company, in the belief

that environmentally and socially sustainable

companies are more likely to be successful in

the long run.

schroders considers what is happening

in the charity sector and responds with

well-constructed educational pieces and a

programme of events aimed at developing

an understanding of investing for charities.

schroders charities also maintains

strong relationships with national charitable

organisations including cFG, AcF and ciG.

indeed, a member of the schroders charities

team, Kate rogers is currently chair of the ciG and

co-wrote the recently published report For

Good And Not For Keeps in collaboration

with AcF.

charity Times Awards Winner in investment Management:

Schroders Charities

In addition to investment services, we offer broader support to the sector. For details of a recent report sponsored by Schroders Charities on how charities should consider calculating expenditure, visit www.schroderscharities.com/spendingdecisions

SupportDedicated

Schroders Charities has been managing assets for charity clients for over 75 years and our first client from the sector remains a client today.

Entrusted with the assets of over 330 charities, foundations and endowments spanning a broad range of types and charitable purposes, our specialist team of 12 has significant investment experience and is committed to working with charities to help them achieve their goals.

Source: Schroders. Data as at 31 August 2013. Schroder & Co. Limited, 100 Wood Street, London EC2V 7ER. Registered No: 2280926 England. Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority

S C H R O D E R S C H A R I T I E S

Contact us for more information

020 7658 3104schroderscharities@schroders.com www.schroderscharities.com

www.charitytimes.com/awards

Best use of the WebRefuge: Don’t Cover IT Up

Pr Team of the YearMuscular Dystrophy Campaign

international charityMuslim Aid

hr Management AwardDiabetes UK

www.charitytimes.com/awards

Financial Management AwardThe British School of Osteopathy

social investment initiativeGolden Lane Housing

Big society AwardForever Manchester

Fundraising Technology AwardPlumpy Nut Challenge/Merlin:

Charity Times Awards 2013

WINNERS

www.charitytimes.com/awards

corporate community Local involvementDemalza Hospice Care for Children/Axis Europe

corporate national Partnership championUK Youth/Microsoft

corporate national Partnership of the Year with a retailerMarine Conservation Society/Marks & Spencer

corporate national Partnership of the Year with a Financial institutionCitizens UK/KMPG

www.charitytimes.com/awards

cross-sector Partnership of the YearThe Brain Tumor Charity/The University of Nottingham/ The RCPCH/The Health Foundation

corporate social responsibility Project of the YearCancer Research UK/Nivea Sun

Best use of TechnologyRoyal Hospital for Neuro-disability

social champion AwardBig Issue Invest

Charity Times Awards 2013

WINNERS

www.charitytimes.com/awards

Boutique investment ManagementQuilter Cheviot

consultancy of the YearBroadway’s Real People

SAvE THE DATE

22 October 2014Lancaster London Hotel

www.charitytimes.com/awards

www.charitytimes.com/awards

Gold Sponsors

In Association with

Media Partner

THANK YOU TO OUR SPONSORS

Charity Times Awards 2013

WINNERS

To advertise in the Charity Times Suppliers Directory contact Cerys Brafield 07766 662 610 or Steve Good 020 7562 2435

S U P P L I E R S D I R E C T O R Y

ACEVO

1 New Oxford Street London WC1A 1NU

T: +44 (0) 20 7280 4960 F: +44 (0) 20 7280 4989 E: info@acevo.org.uk

The Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations (ACEVO) supports members by providing access to:

● Third sector leadership and governance resources to support boards and senior management teams ● Information, publications and reports on key third sector issues ● Conferences, courses and networking opportunities to enhance skills and build knowledge ● Dedicated helplines and support services such as CEO in Crisis - a service for third sector CEOs facing disputes with their board.

ACEVO also acts on behalf of members; connecting members to key contacts in government.

Charity Finance Group

CAN Mezzanine 49-51 East Road London N1 6AH

T: 0845 345 3192 F: 0845 345 3193

Company Registration No. 3182826

Charity Registration No. 1054914

The Charity Finance Group (CFG) is the charity that champions best practice in finance management in the charity and voluntary sector. Our vision is a transparent and efficiently managed charity sector that engenders public confidence and trust. With this aim in sight, CFG delivers services to its charity members and the sector at large which enable those with financial responsibility in the charity sector to develop and adopt best practice. With more than 1700 members, managing over £21.75 billion, (which represents around half of the sector’s income) we are uniquely placed to challenge regulation which threatens the effective use of charity funds, drive efficiency and help charities to make the most out of their money.

For more information, please see www.cfg.org.uk

Wilkins Kennedy LLP Chartered Accountants & Business Advisers

John Howard T: 020 7403 1877 E: john.howard@wilkinskennedy.com

Michelle Wilkes T: 01689 827 505 E: michelle.wilkes@wilkinskennedy.com

Wilkins Kennedy deliver personal service and provide proactive and practical advice to help charities achieve their objectives, improve profitability and overcome obstacles.

Our dedicated Not for Profit group consists of a multidisciplinary team of experts with first hand knowledge of and experience in the voluntary sector.

We understand the specific needs and ambitions of our not for profit clients and adapt our services to suit each client’s circumstances.

For more information on our services please visit our website www.wilkinskennedy.com

ASSOCIATIONS

ACCOUNTANTS AND AUDITORS

CHARIT Y MARKETING

graffiti media group

The Barn Bury Road, Thetford East Anglia IP31 1HG

T: 01842 760075 F: 01842 339501

E: bestdata@gmgroup.uk.com W: gmgroup.uk.com

the modern art of no fuss, donor acquisition lead generation | data | media | creativePR

Specialising in the charity sector, we offer a portfolio of products and services to help charities maximise a return from their investment in donor acquisition marketing and call centre services.

A team of the industry’s best planners and strategists with open, honest, ethics and knowledgeable market expertise. Together we’ll build robust, consistent response rates.

• dataprocurementandplanning • charityspecifictelephoneleadgeneration • customerandcampaignmanagement

• mediabuying • callcentreservices

CONFERENCE

Sourthport Conferences

Tourism Department Sourthport Town Hall Lord Street Southport PR8 1DA

T: 0151 934 2436 E: info@southportconferences.com W: www.southportconferences.com

After the conference, Rex decided to stay & holiday for a while.

● Fantastic range of venues for 6 to 1600 delegates ● £40m investment in flagship convention centre ● Accessible, coastal location ● Superb quality and value without compromise

Call Sammi or Tonia on 0151 934 2436

directory_October2013.indd 2 10/28/2013 11:49:42 AM

To advertise in the Charity Times Suppliers Directory contact Cerys McLean 07766 662 610 or Aisling Davis 0207 562 2426

S U P P L I E R S D I R E C T O R Y

To advertise in the Charity Times Suppliers Directory contact Cerys Brafield 07766 662 610 or Steve Good 020 7562 2435

S U P P L I E R S D I R E C T O R Y

FUNDRAISING SOFT WARE

ASI Europe

2 Station Court Imperial Wharf London SW6 2PY

T: +44 (0) 20 3267 0067 E: sales@asieurope.eu W: www.asieurope.eu

Europe’s no.1 specialist software provider for the fundraising community

Advanced Solutions International (ASI) is the largest, privately-owned global provider of web-based software for not-for-profits, and has served nearly 3000 clients and millions of users worldwide since 1991.

ASI Europe offers solutions for mid-sized to larger charities and fundraising organisations.

iMIS 20 is an Engagement Management System (EMS)™ that enables your organisation to engage members, donors, and other constituents anytime, anywhere, from any device. It includes member/donor management, member self-service, online fundraising, social engagement, private communities, mobile access, and website management in one seamless system. iMIS 20 eliminates costly integration efforts, gathers better member/donor intelligence, and helps you make smarter business decisions.

INSURANCE

Ecclesiastical Insurance Office

Beaufort House Brunswick Road Gloucester GL1 1JZ

Visit our website or talk to your broker to find out more.

T: 0845 850 0307 E: information@ecclesiastical.com W: www.ecclesiastical.com/CTimes

At Ecclesiastical, we’ve been insuring not for profit organisations for 125 years. Today, we insure thousands of the nation’s charities of all sizes and complexities.

Voted best charity insurer* for the last five years running by both charities and brokers, we’ve worked closely with both to develop a flexible, specialist product that meets the varying needs of different types of charities.

We also offer a complete package of guidance and advice that’s there to give you support when you need it.

Speaktoyourbrokerformoreinformationorvisitwww.ecclesiastical.com/CTimes

* In research conducted by FWD, an independent market research company, of those brokers and organi-sations who named an insurer in the survey, the majority voted Ecclesiastical as the best insurer for charity

• mediabuying • callcentreservices

Advanced Business Solutions

ASR House, Arden Grove, Harpenden, Hertfordshire, AL5 4SJ

T: 01582 714 810 E: nfp@advancedcomputersoftware.com W: www.advancedcomputersoftware.com/ abs/charities.php

Advanced Business Solutions develops and delivers award winning software solutions to the Not-For-Profit sector. Our integrated solutions can be deployed in-house or as a cloud-based application providing end to end coverage of the back office and operational functions

With over 1000 NFP customers, we have the knowledge, track record and service capability to help you implement and support a new system, ensuring excellent user satisfaction as well as a quick Return On Investment.

Our solutions cover the complete spectrum of NFP requirements including:

Finance, HR & Payroll, CRM, Fundraising, Donor Management, Sector Specific Reporting, Document Management, Cloud Application Delivery & IT Outsourcing

Markel (UK) Limited

Riverside West Whitehall Road Leeds LS1 4AW

T: 0845 351 2600 E: socialwelfare@markeluk.com W: www.markeluk.com/socialwelfare

We protect those who help others.

We offer three types of insurance policy for charities, not for profit organisations and care providers: ● Social welfare insurance: a comprehensive policy which can cover the vast majority of liabilities you face, including abuse and volunteers. ● Not-for-profitmanagementliabilityinsurance: a policy which protects directors, officers and trustees against alleged wrongful acts. ● Community groups insurance: a specific policy designed for smaller organisations.

Policy benefits include care and health consultancy, employer helpline and PR crisis management.

SocialWelfareinsurancefromMarkel.Askyourbroker.

Stackhouse Poland Limited

New House Bedford Road Guildford GU1 4SJ

T: 01483 407 440 F: 01483 407 441 W: www.stackhouse.co.uk

Stackhouse Poland look after 400 charities and “not for profit” organisations in the UK.

Our specialist team arrange a broad range of insurance programmes for our charity clients, including property and liability as well as motor, charity trustee cover and travel policies for aid workers, etc.

The Company also arranges insurance for a large number of corporate clients and has a specialist private client division advising affluent and High Net Worth clients on their personal insurance needs.

Contact us for a free DVD outlining our services to the Charity sector and to discuss our 10 point Charity checklist for insurance.

Finalist Commercial Broker of the Year 2013 Finalist Private Client Broker of the Year 2013 Nominated for Insurance Broker of the Year 2013 Independent Regional Broker of the Year 2007

directory_October2013.indd 3 10/28/2013 11:49:45 AM

To advertise in the Charity Times Suppliers Directory contact Cerys Brafield 07766 662 610 or Steve Good 020 7562 2435

S U P P L I E R S D I R E C T O R Y

Zurich Insurance plc

Zurich House 2 Gladiator Way Farnborough Hampshire GU14 6GB

T: 07730 735394 W: zurich.co.uk/insight

Unity Insurance Services

Lancing Business Park Lancing West Sussex BN15 8UG

T: 0845 0945 702 F: 01903 751044 E: info@unityinsuranceservices.co.uk W: www.unityinsuranceservices.co.uk

Insurance for charities with 100% of our profits returned to charity.

As a charity owned insurance broker, Unity Insurance Services has a unique insight into your sector. For over 80 years, we have been protecting the people, property, liabilities and activities of charities.

We view each charity as unique so we always aim to provide solutions that fit your exacting needs. That’s why we will spend the time to understand in detail your activities and risks to obtain the best possible cover at the best possible price.

Visit our website or telephone to us to find out more.

Insight cover – Specialist charity insurance made simple

Zurich works with over 10,000 charitable and voluntary organisations to provide insurance and risk management services. We have dedicated teams who work with charities to understand their needs and provide the appropriate cover, guidance and support. We collaborate with a number of organisations, including NAVCA, ACEVO and CTN.

The Zurich UK business also support an annual £1.9 million grant programme to The Zurich Community Trust (UK) Limited and around 35% of the Zurich UK workforce share their skills with the community each year.

Our Insight insurance cover includes:

Visit zurich.co.uk/insightorcallus for more information on how we can help your organisation.

● Property ‘All Risks’ ● Business Interruption ● Trustee Indemnity

● Employer’s Liability ● Public & Products Liability ● Professional Indemnity

● Money ● Personal Accident ● Employee Dishonesty

INSURANCE

Baring Asset Management Limited

155 Bishopsgate London EC2M 3XY

Contact: Catherine Booth

T: 020 7214 1807 E: catherine.booth@barings.com

We have been providing investment management services to the charitable sector since 1926, and were one of the first investment managers to establish our own charities team in 1968, a team that now manages over £850 million on behalf of charities around the world1.

We work in partnership with charities that operate in diverse sectors, whether you are a national institution or a charity with more local aims.

Our Targeted Return approach is designed to balance risk and return. We focus our global perspective, experience and expertise with the aim of successfully meeting our clients’ investment management needs.

We would welcome the opportunity to speak to you should you be reviewing your existing investment arrangements or merely want to hear a different point of view.

Issued by Baring Asset Management Limited (Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority). 1As at 30/09/13. The value of investments may go down as well as up and is not guaranteed.

INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT

Charities Aid Foundation

25 Kings Hill Avenue Kings Hill West Malling Kent ME19 4TA

For further information, please contact our investments team on:

T: 03000 123 444 E: managingmoney@cafonline.org Or visit www.cafonline.org/investments

Investments designed with charities in mind

As a charity, CAF understands the challenges you face when it comes to investments. Managed by our third party provider, the CAF Managed Portfolio Service places your capacity for risk at the heart of each solution. It provides:

● Returns based on capacity for risk. ● Asset allocation advice and ongoing portfolio management. ● Solutions using a combination of funds from some of the largest investment houses.

Alternatively, the CAF Direct Investment Service allows you to select from a range of investment funds specifically designed for not for profit organisations.

IssuedbyCAFFinancialSolutionsLimited(CFSL), 25 Kings Hill Avenue, Kings Hill, West Malling, Kent ME19 4TA; company registration number 2771873 (England and Wales). CFSL is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FRN 189450). CFSL is a subsidiary of the Charities Aid Foundation (registered charity number 268369). Telephone calls may be monitored/recorded for security/training purposes and by calling you give your consent to this.

Cerno Capital Partners LLP

34 Sackville Street, St James’s London W1S 3ED

For more information, please contact Mustafa Abbas, Nick Hornby, James Spence

T: 0207 382 4112 E: charities@cernocapital.com W: www.cernocapital.com

Cerno Capital works closely with charities, helping them organise and manage their investment portfolios.

It is our view that the only way to obtain a reliable investment return is to identify the prevailing macro-economic themes and then follow a robust methodology for selecting investments. We take a real world approach to risk, concentrating on the risks of losing money and not just the measurement of volatility.

We invest globally, across multiple asset classes and take a long term outlook to wealth preservation and growth.

We act as both discretionary managers and advisors to charities.

directory_October2013.indd 4 10/28/2013 11:49:46 AM

To advertise in the Charity Times Suppliers Directory contact Cerys McLean 07766 662 610 or Aisling Davis 0207 562 2426

S U P P L I E R S D I R E C T O R Y

To advertise in the Charity Times Suppliers Directory contact Cerys Brafield 07766 662 610 or Steve Good 020 7562 2435

S U P P L I E R S D I R E C T O R Y

INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT

JOHambroInvestmentManagement

21 St. James’s Square London SW1Y 4HB

For further information, please contact Francesca McSloy

T: +44 (0) 20 7484 2065 E: fmcsloy@johim.co.uk W: www.johim.co.uk

Award Winning Boutique Approach

JOHIM’s charity business provides trustees with a service that combines accountability with personal attention to detail. All charity portfolios, whatever their size, are managed on a segregated basis and investment goals are agreed to meet individual requirements. We do not run a single charity vehicle or model portfolios as this inflexible approach to investment management is the antithesis of our culture.

• Dedicatedcharityteam • Directrelationshipwithfundmanagers • Strongperformance

• Tailoredmandates • Institutionalinvestmentprocess • Bespoketrusteetraining

C. Hoare & Co.

37 Fleet Street London EC4P 4DQ

Simon Barker, Head of Charities T: 020 7353 4522 E: simon.barker@hoaresbank.co.uk W: www.hoaresbank.co.uk

Independence,StabilityandIntegrity

We offer charities a full bespoke service across investment management, banking, lending and cash administration.

● Fully independent with no in-house funds or products ● Stable family ownership for over 340 years ● Strong risk-adjusted performance ● Simple fee structure ● Award-winning service ● Longstanding connection with the charity sector ● Values supported by philanthropic family

J.P. Morgan

1 Knightsbridge London, SW1X 7LX

For more information please contact: Tom Rutherford, Head of UK Charities T: 020 7742 2819 E: tom.rutherford@jpmorgan.com W: www.jpmorgan.co.uk/institutional/ charities

Strength, Scope & Commitment

J.P. Morgan is dedicated to helping charities address their investment and financial needs. Drawing on our global resources and 50 years experience in the sector we offer services specific to each Charity’s needs.

Acting as both discretionary managers and advisors we work with charities to: ● Tailor investment policy statements and strategies● Manage a range of portfolios across asset types based on capacity for risk● Strengthen board governance guidelines

Our Charity team is one of the leading providers to the sector managing assets in excess of £1.4 billion for around 300 non-profit organisations in the UK.

Jupiter Asset Management Limited

1 Grosvenor Place London SW1X 7JJ

For more information contact: Melanie

Wotherspoon Jupiter Private Clients &

Charities Business Development Director

T: 020 7314 5574 E: mwotherspoon@jupitergroup.co.uk W: www.jupiteronline.com

Jupiter Private Clients & Charities has been managing assets for over 25 years. At the heart

of our ethos is delivering long-term outperformance for our charity clients, without

exposing them to undue risk. Our clients include large national charities and small local

charities in a wide range of sectors. Charities use our services in order to achieve the aims

of their organisation. Through close relationships we seek to fully understand those aims

and objectives and use our investment expertise to help realise them. Our dedicated team

of professional investment managers look after a limited number of clients, ensuring that

we offer and maintain an excellent standard of service.

Jupiter Asset Management (JAM) is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct

Authority. The value of an investment can fall as well as rise and you may get back less

than originally invested.

Quilter Cheviot

Contact: Nadine Dixon or Nicola Tuthill t: +44 (0) 20 7662 6322 e: nadine.dixon@quiltercheviot.com t: +44 (0) 20 7662 6562 e: nicola.tuthill@quiltercheviot.com

Website: www.quiltercheviot.com

Quilter Cheviot Limited is registered in England with number 01923571, registered office at St Helen’s, 1 Undershaft, London EC3A 8BB. Quilter Cheviot Limited is a member of the London Stock Exchange and authorised and regulated by the UK Financial Conduct Authority.

Quilter Cheviot is one of the UK’s largest independently owned discretionary investment firms, created by the 2013 merger of Quilter and Cheviot Asset Management. The firm focuses primarily on structuring and managing bespoke discretionary portfolios for charities, trusts, pension funds, private clients and intermediaries. Our charity assets under management are well in excess of £1bn*, making us one of the leading charity managers in the UK.

We offer your charity:

• Directaccesstodedicated managers with the knowledge and experience to tailor your charity’s portfolio to meet its investment objectives. • Aninvestmentprocessthatcan respond rapidly to changing market conditions. • Comprehensivereporting and access to portfolio valuations via our password protected website. • Acompetitiveandtransparent fee structure.

*As at 30 June 2013

directory_October2013.indd 5 10/28/2013 11:49:48 AM

To advertise in the Charity Times Suppliers Directory contact Cerys Brafield 07766 662 610 or Steve Good 020 7562 2435

S U P P L I E R S D I R E C T O R Y

INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT

Sarasin & Partners LLP

Juxon House 100 St Paul’s Churchyard London EC4M 8BU

Contact: John Handford

T: 020 7038 7268 F: 020 7038 6864 E: john.handford@sarasin.co.uk W: www.sarasin.co.uk

Sarasin & Partners is a leading charity fund manager managing £3.7 billion for approximately 275 discretionary clients. Significantly, this represents over 25% of our overall business. In total, as at 31 December 2012, we manage around £12.4 billion.

Investment philosophy founded on three main strands: dynamic asset allocation, the importance of recurring income and our well-established global thematic approach to international equity selection.

Tailor-made solutions; via segregated portfolios, single asset class funds or two Common Investment Funds - the Alpha CIF for Endowments and the Alpha CIF for Income & Reserves.

Sarasin & Partners LLP is a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales with registered number OC329859 and is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority.

Rathbone Investment Management

1 Curzon Street, London, W1J 5FB

For further information please contact Francesca Monti:

E: francesca.monti@rathbones.com T: 020 7399 0119 W: www.rathbones.com

Rathbone Investment Management is authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority.

Many managers talk, Rathbones listens and has done so for over a century.

With listening comes the insight to serve with full understanding of each charity’s circumstances and aspirations; putting their obligations and best interests first. In finding the correct solution, we access investment opportunities globally and have the flexibility to adapt your portfolio as and when your charity’s needs change. Our service is underpinned by a direct and personal relationship, which in conjunction with our commitment to the sector, we hope to maintain over the long term. Rathbones manages £2.4 billion of charitable funds for over 960 charities (at 30 June 2013).

For further information contact Francesca Monti on 020 7399 0119 or at francesca.monti@rathbones.com

UBS

3 Finsbury Avenue London EC2M 2AN

Andrew Wauchope - Head of Charities E: andrew.wauchope@ubs.com T: +44 20756 70166 W: www.ubs.com/charities-uk

Charity focused, performance driven

Access all the investment insight and guidance your charity needs through our dedicated team of experts, structured and ethical investment process and worldleading research.

The value of your investments may fall as well as rise as a result of market and currency fluctuations. You may not get back the amount you invested.

Authorised and regulated by Financial Market Supervisory Authority in Switzerland. In the United Kingdom, UBS AG is authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and is subject to regulation by the Financial Conduct Authority and limited regulation by the Prudential Regulation Authority. Details about the extent of our regulation by the Prudential Regulation Authority are available from us on request.

A focus on capital preservation and consistent returns

Ruffer is an absolute return investment manager. Instead of following benchmarks, we aim not to lose money in any single year and to deliver a return significantly greater than the risk free alternative of cash on deposit. Capital stability is essential to provide a sound platform for income generation and for growth of capital and income. By aiming to avoid the cyclical gyrations of the market, we aspire to provide a less volatile experience for our charity clients.

We manage over £15bn of assets including £1.5bn for over 200 charities. Our charity clients span all major charitable sectors and include some of the largest endowments in the UK. A dedicated portfolio manager works with each charity to build an appropriate segregated portfolio, which may include ethical screening if required. We also manage a Common Investment Fund, the Charity Assets Trust.

Ruffer LLP is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority

Ruffer LLP

80 Victoria Street London SW1E 5JL

For more information contact: Christopher Querée

T: +44 (0)20 7963 8100 F: +44 (0)20 7963 8175 E: cqueree@ruffer.co.uk

TSA

50 Andover Road, Tivoli, Cheltenham, GL50 2TL

T: 01242 263167 F: 01242 584201 E: James@3sector.co.uk W: www.cc14.co.uk

Independent Charity Reviews

TSA provides independent investment reviews and training for trustees to assist with fund management.

We can help you with:- ● Reserves Policy ● Developing a comprehensive Investment Policy ● Investment policy review – aims & objectives ● Establishment of investment mandate for your manger to work with. ● Independent Search & Selection process – designed to help you look for the right manager ● Continual Trustee guidance to help monitor your investments, and keep up-to date ● Advice on Ethical & SRI approaches to investment

INVESTMENT RE VIE W SER VICES

directory_October2013.indd 6 10/29/2013 3:08:34 PM

To advertise in the Charity Times Suppliers Directory contact Cerys McLean 07766 662 610 or Aisling Davis 0207 562 2426

S U P P L I E R S D I R E C T O R Y

To advertise in the Charity Times Suppliers Directory contact Cerys Brafield 07766 662 610 or Steve Good 020 7562 2435

S U P P L I E R S D I R E C T O R Y

LOT TERIES

Lottery in a box

Phil Sawicki 2nd Floor Cavendish House 369 Burnt Oak Broadway HA8 5AW

T: 020 8381 2430, E: info@fi-ltd.com W: www.fundraising-initiatives.org/en/products-services/Lottery-Canvassing/

Lotteries are a fantastic way for charities to raise money and recruit new donors, but setting it all up can be expensive. Fundraising Initiatives has the answer with Lottery in a Box; a fully managed lottery programme that allows charities to increase their fundraising income and recruit new & long term donors. It’s fully compliant, easy to set up and includes on-going management, prizes/jackpots and FREE Marketing Resources. With Lottery in a Box all the charity needs to do is decide how many new donors they wish to recruit and we take care of all the rest!

Advertise your services directly to our subscribers using our Suppliers Directory

If you are a supplier to the charity and not-for-profit sector and want to maintain consistent visibility amongst potential customers then why not include your company within the suppliers section of Charity Times. Your entry would be listed for 12 months (print & online) and includes company logo, contact details and company description/products

Charity decision makers use this section to find suitable expert suppliers. So call us on 0207 562 2423 with your details and we will create a listing to ensure that your company is visible within this valuable resource.

Call us on 0207 562 2423

www.charitytimes.com

ZEBRA TM

1st Floor The Barn 11 Bury Road Thetford IP24 3PJ

Contact: Anne Short

T: 01842 760075 E: calltheherd@zebratm.org W: www.zebratm.org

A new breed of UK telephone fundraising agency with a specialist charity team both unique and distinctive.

Providing you with outbound telephone services from our call centre in East Anglia, we offer all charities our core services of donor development, cold and warm acquisition.

ZEBRA TM is ready to welcome you with a new flexible approach to deliver outstanding results that can test and roll out as your campaigns require, no matter how big or small your requirement is.

Supplying your acquisition programmes with passion and insight, we’ll work closely with you to recruit happy and committed donors for lifelong supporters utilising a background of over 25 years’ experience in charity direct marketing.

Contact us now and join the herd, it’s so much more than black and white.

TELEPHONE FUNDRAISING

directory_October2013.indd 7 10/29/2013 3:08:42 PM

zebra.indd 1 10/29/2013 2:51:13 PM